Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
Boris Johnson holds nothing back in attacking 'narcissistic defections and praising Kemi Badenoch [daily mail]
Any hope by the Boris disciples now in Reform of him joining them is for the birds
Good to see a former PM call out the err, narcissistic, opportunistic, disloyal, nakedly ambitious, good at public speaking and drawing attention without any substance or delivery types who somehow rise to the top despite many obvious flaws.
Indeed. However, the takeaway is not the political and personal hypocrisy - that's a given - but the fact that, so far, not a single Tory big beast has come out for Reform.
Imagine a world in which Major, Clarke, May, Cameron, Gove, Boris, Hammond, Rishi, Heseltine, or any two them had denounced the Tories and come out for Reform. Things would look very different.
Bizarre perspective. The cast list above are most of what your average Reform voter would see as wrong with the Tory party. You might as well say that Reform are going nowhere because Rory Stewart or John Bercow hasn’t come out for them.
Indeed, none of that list would go Reform and Stewart, Clarke and Heseltine would go LD over Reform.
John Redwood of the big beasts is probably the likeliest to go Reform followed by IDS but both of them like Kemi so aren't going anywhere for now.
The only remaining Tory I think is more likely than not to go Reform is Braverman, even Francois has now said Jenrick was wrong and a traitor to his former supporters and he ran Jenrick's leadership campaign
Afternoon all.
I was thinking of IDS . Only Redwood, ofcourse, would have the gravitas to match big beasts already in Reform, such as Sir Robert Jenrick, or Sir Jake Berry.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
But I don’t think even that’s true. Huge numbers of people are very angry about lockdowns and masks and the rest. So yeah I think far more than 1% of the country would like to see the scientists responsible in jail
Likewise, Vance was part of the Lancet/Fauci cover-up of potential lab leak. The attempt to gaslight us all into thinking that was a “racist conspiracy theory”
He should be in a supermax jail in Nevada
Agreed. That certain key individuals have not faced justice can only really be that everyone has Covid ptsd and wants to forget it. Trillions of dollars of economic damage, millions of early deaths.
The easiest thing psychologically (and hence politically) is to just accept that it was no one’s fault it started, blame those who were anti lockdown for making things worse and move on with your life.
It could also be because they haven't committed indictable crimes, or they can't be proved to have done so beyond reasonable doubt?
I hated the COVID lockdowns myself and knew they would be disastrous, and not necessarily stop the pandemic spreading at all, though they could have slowed it by a few days. But locking people up just because you disagree with them is wrong and a dangerous precedent anyway, no matter how satisfying. COVID measures were implemented by Parliament, with no more than the usual amount of official lying that accompanies anything the government really wants to do, and had overwhelming public support.
Indeed many wanted COVID measures to be much harsher. So in a way, we have to admire the government's restraint - unlike if the current cretins had been in charge.
Indeed. It’s an unpopular opinion, but having someone like Boris as PM, whose instinct was to keep freedoms, and someone like Cummings next to him, who understood the need for accurate data and computer modelling, were big positives for the country.
The current lot would have been considerably worse.
Yes.
I think under any other PM than Boris, Covid would have been much worse.
It was bad enough as it is.
Can you imagine a furlough package designed by Reeves and Bell?
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
But I don’t think even that’s true. Huge numbers of people are very angry about lockdowns and masks and the rest. So yeah I think far more than 1% of the country would like to see the scientists responsible in jail
Likewise, Vance was part of the Lancet/Fauci cover-up of potential lab leak. The attempt to gaslight us all into thinking that was a “racist conspiracy theory”
He should be in a supermax jail in Nevada
Agreed. That certain key individuals have not faced justice can only really be that everyone has Covid ptsd and wants to forget it. Trillions of dollars of economic damage, millions of early deaths.
The easiest thing psychologically (and hence politically) is to just accept that it was no one’s fault it started, blame those who were anti lockdown for making things worse and move on with your life.
Yup. Exactly
I feel it myself. The anger has ebbed. Not because the injustice was in fact modest, it was catastrophic and Satanic
I just can’t bear thinking about the pandemic. Worst time of my life. Move on
I'm still very angry about it - particularly the lack of respect shown to young people. I still vividly recall the Radio Scotland phone-in where pensioners wanted young people to be banned from going out so they could safely go to the pub. Absolute *****. The lack of personal responsibility too - depending entirely on lockdowns rather than telling everyone to lose some weight and get fit so as to reduce the chance of ending up in hospital. The gigantic debt we ran up that continues to cripple our public finances (there should have been a National Crisis tax on high earners/wealth, sat in their gorgeous gardens and chucking £10ks into their ISAs while everyone else went insane and bankrupt).
But I reserve my anger for the politicians. It's their job to get this right. Be honest - if it was Starmer rather than Johnson, Biden rather than Trump, it wouldn't be the scientists being threatened with jail.
Just thinking about minor aspects of the pandemic - the madness of it all - washing your hands as you sing Happy Birthday - the supermarkets with arrow signs down the aisles - the ludicrous saucepan banging to save the fucking NHS - makes me feel simultaneously bewildered, disbelieving, and mutinous, with a side order of suicidal bleakness, as I remember how sad and alone I was in lockdown 3
So, I don't think about it. We remember wars and forget plagues, for this reason, as a wise writer noted, quite early in the pando
I proud to say I never once banged saucepans for the NHS.
Even Farage did that.
Weirdly, this particular position unites the two of us Casino, despite our manifest political differences.
Although I have to admit that I didn’t publicly announce that I was forswearing pan banging as an empty gesture. Passive avoidance is no real resistance at all in reality, but it was an argument that seemed pointless to enter in to at the time.
If you had, it'd have gone down about as well as critiquing the ridiculously effusive coverage of Nelson Mandela when he died, or George Floyd when he was murdered.
Sometimes, people are simply too neurotic to listen, and you'll be punished for not reading the room.
A very believable account of what it's like inside the NEU, our largest teaching union. Hard left Palestine fanaticism.
Oh it's the Telegraph...... Fine I await the rebuttal. No doubt the 'liberal right' will be keen to ignore it all as it pertains to a culture war. Ignoring the fact that that is what the hard left is doing, embedding itself as best it can in as many institutions as possible.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
It's very gratifying seeing recognition of this fact from some unexpected quarters.
On the Blair appointment, trying to be fair here, given it has been a long time since he held public office, does he still have the skills or knowledge to be useful in such a role? He has what I'm told is a consequential think tank, if there is such a thing, and he was special envoy in and around the region a decade and more ago, is any of that genuinely helpful here or do they just need figures of general recognition who are the right sort of chaps?
I think Blair is pretty smart.
Also a globally recognised statesman whatever else you think of him, the only other UK PM in my lifetime in that category was Thatcher and before that you had to go back to Churchill
As far as I'm concerned he was doing pretty well up to Iraq but the he irretrievably blotted his copybook.
Thank you, I shall listen to it later. I was on Prof Spiegelhalter's pub quiz team one night (RSS Glasgow 2017) and you still see his face occasionally in conferences.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
How can Grenfell costs (i.e. putting fire retardant cladding on properties where it should have been in place in the first place) be fixed via a magic wand - it's a money (i.e. who is paying for the "screw up" by procurement in the building firm) and time (limited labour resources) issue.
As for leasehold - it's going to be years, because there will be multiple court cases as soon as the Government works out how they can fix things.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
You’ve hit the nail on the head - the people who so easily dismiss as “centrist” everyone from socialists like owls and Palmer through hard core Tories like Casino and HY, not to mention our bonnie cadre of Scots Nats, have simply thrown themselves out of the Overton window and are then observing, from their position squished on the gravel driveway of reality, that everyone else seems to be still upstairs.
It would be great to define "centrism" though, and get some polling to work out what topics are included. I guess it would be something that enjoys perhaps 60 - 70% support, but there are significant fringes that are opposed. Using this, Claude gives me:
Increasing number of foreign students
Current levels of skilled immigration
Full staffing the NHS even if it means more immigration
Assisted dying
Closer ties with the EU
The Monarchy
But not included is
Increase bus services (80% support)
Clean rivers (90)
Increase investment in Renewables (over 80)
Rejoin the EU (50)
National Service (28)
Jail Chris Whitty (I would guess less than 5)
The Boriswave (less than 5)
Plus same sex marriage but not Trans in female bathrooms
1 all Water bosses to take a dip in british rivers, to see how they like it
2 national service to be introduced for all former prime ministers
3 wifi on trains that works
4 trains that work
5 the reintroduction of ceefax
6 children in need to finally get round to fixing pudsey’s eye
7 traffic on northallerton high street to be fixed by a new space bridge, bypassing both level crossings
8 european countries to be invited to join the uk, creating a new ‘union of europe’, if you will
9 wallace and gromit to be knighted, for services to wensleydale
10 I pledge to build at least one affordable house
11 croissants to be price-capped at £1.10, and 99 flakes to cost 99p
12 national yorkshire pudding day to be a bank holiday (except for banks)
13 loud snacks to be banned from cinemas and theatres
14 pensions to be double-locked, but with a little extra chain on the side
15 claudia winkleman’s fringe to be grade 1-listed
16 new series of gladiators to feature ’90s gladiators against age-appropriate contenders
17 minsters’ pay to be tied to that of nurses for the next 100 years
18 shops that play christmas music before december to be closed down and turned into public libraries
19 to combat the uk’s increasingly wet climate, all british citizens to be offered stilts
20 a ban on speakerphones on public transport. offenders to be forced to live with matt hancock for a year
21 the mini golf course at richmond swimming pool to host the open championship
22 mps to live in the area they wish to serve for 4 years before election, to improve local representation
23 the hand dryer in the gents’ urinals at the crown & treaty, uxbridge to be moved to a more sensible position.
24 count binface to represent the uk at eurovision
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
But I don’t think even that’s true. Huge numbers of people are very angry about lockdowns and masks and the rest. So yeah I think far more than 1% of the country would like to see the scientists responsible in jail
Likewise, Vance was part of the Lancet/Fauci cover-up of potential lab leak. The attempt to gaslight us all into thinking that was a “racist conspiracy theory”
He should be in a supermax jail in Nevada
Agreed. That certain key individuals have not faced justice can only really be that everyone has Covid ptsd and wants to forget it. Trillions of dollars of economic damage, millions of early deaths.
The easiest thing psychologically (and hence politically) is to just accept that it was no one’s fault it started, blame those who were anti lockdown for making things worse and move on with your life.
It could also be because they haven't committed indictable crimes, or they can't be proved to have done so beyond reasonable doubt?
I hated the COVID lockdowns myself and knew they would be disastrous, and not necessarily stop the pandemic spreading at all, though they could have slowed it by a few days. But locking people up just because you disagree with them is wrong and a dangerous precedent anyway, no matter how satisfying. COVID measures were implemented by Parliament, with no more than the usual amount of official lying that accompanies anything the government really wants to do, and had overwhelming public support.
Indeed many wanted COVID measures to be much harsher. So in a way, we have to admire the government's restraint - unlike if the current cretins had been in charge.
Indeed. It’s an unpopular opinion, but having someone like Boris as PM, whose instinct was to keep freedoms, and someone like Cummings next to him, who understood the need for accurate data and computer modelling, were big positives for the country.
The current lot would have been considerably worse.
Yes.
I think under any other PM than Boris, Covid would have been much worse.
It was bad enough as it is.
Can you imagine a furlough package designed by Reeves and Bell?
Shudders...
They'd have probably taxed pubs and restaurants further for being a social risk to further infection.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
How can Grenfell costs (i.e. putting fire retardant cladding on properties where it should have been in place in the first place) be fixed via a magic wand - it's a money (i.e. who is paying for the "screw up" by procurement in the building firm) and time (limited labour resources) issue.
As for leasehold - it's going to be years, because there will be multiple court cases as soon as the Government works out how they can fix things.
The costs are unavoidable. The regulatory mistakes are not & can be reversed.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
If the US genuinely expect a major confrontation with China why are they doing so much to lose allies in advance of that confrontation?
They’re trying, in a slightly weird way, to get everyone else ready.
If China does go for Taiwan it’s going to be WWIII, and right now only the Americans are prepared to fight the war.
If China does go for Taiwan there's going to be a very, very bloody mess on the Taiwanese beaches. And elsewhere in Taiwan, even though the majority of the population is now ethnically Chinese, not Taiwanese. I assume that the Danes (etc) having seen what happened in Caracas are now ready to defend Nuuk again the sort of 'American Commando' attack we saw there.
The biggest mess, unseen by most of us, will be in the electronics factories of Taiwan, and that’s why it’ll be WWIII.
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
On the Blair appointment, trying to be fair here, given it has been a long time since he held public office, does he still have the skills or knowledge to be useful in such a role? He has what I'm told is a consequential think tank, if there is such a thing, and he was special envoy in and around the region a decade and more ago, is any of that genuinely helpful here or do they just need figures of general recognition who are the right sort of chaps?
I think Blair is pretty smart.
Also a globally recognised statesman whatever else you think of him, the only other UK PM in my lifetime in that category was Thatcher and before that you had to go back to Churchill
As far as I'm concerned he was doing pretty well up to Iraq but the he irretrievably blotted his copybook.
In fairness to Blair Iraq is still Saddam free and now elects its own government, it also led to the fall of Assad and Gaddaffi.
By contrast the Taliban are back in power in Afghanistan and Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan not there
Whatever the annoying personal characteristics, Blair has a pretty good understanding of the middle east now. He was a fool in his time for trying to focus on Israel/Palestine when Clinton had failed though. I'm sure he'll be trusted to go along with the mixing of business and politics.
WRT Covid everyone forgets that the ritualistic clapping was actually supposed to be for carers i.e those putting themselves in harms' way early on in the pandemic when we had little idea how deadly the virus was and before the vaccines were available. Only later on did the NHS lobby make it about themselves.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
You’ve hit the nail on the head - the people who so easily dismiss as “centrist” everyone from socialists like owls and Palmer through hard core Tories like Casino and HY, not to mention our bonnie cadre of Scots Nats, have simply thrown themselves out of the Overton window and are then observing, from their position squished on the gravel driveway of reality, that everyone else seems to be still upstairs.
It would be great to define "centrism" though, and get some polling to work out what topics are included. I guess it would be something that enjoys perhaps 60 - 70% support, but there are significant fringes that are opposed. Using this, Claude gives me:
Increasing number of foreign students
Current levels of skilled immigration
Full staffing the NHS even if it means more immigration
Assisted dying
Closer ties with the EU
The Monarchy
But not included is
Increase bus services (80% support)
Clean rivers (90)
Increase investment in Renewables (over 80)
Rejoin the EU (50)
National Service (28)
Jail Chris Whitty (I would guess less than 5)
The Boriswave (less than 5)
Plus same sex marriage but not Trans in female bathrooms
1 all Water bosses to take a dip in british rivers, to see how they like it
2 national service to be introduced for all former prime ministers
3 wifi on trains that works
4 trains that work
5 the reintroduction of ceefax
6 children in need to finally get round to fixing pudsey’s eye
7 traffic on northallerton high street to be fixed by a new space bridge, bypassing both level crossings
8 european countries to be invited to join the uk, creating a new ‘union of europe’, if you will
9 wallace and gromit to be knighted, for services to wensleydale
10 I pledge to build at least one affordable house
11 croissants to be price-capped at £1.10, and 99 flakes to cost 99p
12 national yorkshire pudding day to be a bank holiday (except for banks)
13 loud snacks to be banned from cinemas and theatres
14 pensions to be double-locked, but with a little extra chain on the side
15 claudia winkleman’s fringe to be grade 1-listed
16 new series of gladiators to feature ’90s gladiators against age-appropriate contenders
17 minsters’ pay to be tied to that of nurses for the next 100 years
18 shops that play christmas music before december to be closed down and turned into public libraries
19 to combat the uk’s increasingly wet climate, all british citizens to be offered stilts
20 a ban on speakerphones on public transport. offenders to be forced to live with matt hancock for a year
21 the mini golf course at richmond swimming pool to host the open championship
22 mps to live in the area they wish to serve for 4 years before election, to improve local representation
23 the hand dryer in the gents’ urinals at the crown & treaty, uxbridge to be moved to a more sensible position.
24 count binface to represent the uk at eurovision
Croissants is a weird one, often cheaper to buy 4 than 1 in the same shop. Can buy about 12 from the local supermarket for the same price as one from Gails. Definitely needs a government price cap.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
The problem is that governments seem to see house prices going down as undoubtedly a bad thing.
They have institutional memory from the early ‘90s which stil hasn’t gone away.
The reality is that house prices can drop 5% in money terms every year for a decade, without anyone on a repayment mortgage experiencing negative equity.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
You’ve hit the nail on the head - the people who so easily dismiss as “centrist” everyone from socialists like owls and Palmer through hard core Tories like Casino and HY, not to mention our bonnie cadre of Scots Nats, have simply thrown themselves out of the Overton window and are then observing, from their position squished on the gravel driveway of reality, that everyone else seems to be still upstairs.
It would be great to define "centrism" though, and get some polling to work out what topics are included. I guess it would be something that enjoys perhaps 60 - 70% support, but there are significant fringes that are opposed. Using this, Claude gives me:
Increasing number of foreign students
Current levels of skilled immigration
Full staffing the NHS even if it means more immigration
Assisted dying
Closer ties with the EU
The Monarchy
But not included is
Increase bus services (80% support)
Clean rivers (90)
Increase investment in Renewables (over 80)
Rejoin the EU (50)
National Service (28)
Jail Chris Whitty (I would guess less than 5)
The Boriswave (less than 5)
That would absolutely not enjoy 60-70% support.
"Centrist" is said more in hope than reality; most people do not favour liberal internationalism and open borders.
Each of those topics get around 60-70% support on YouGov. I think it's a reasonable approximation for "centrism", if we understand it as a majority but not unanimous opinion.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
If the US genuinely expect a major confrontation with China why are they doing so much to lose allies in advance of that confrontation?
They’re trying, in a slightly weird way, to get everyone else ready.
If China does go for Taiwan it’s going to be WWIII, and right now only the Americans are prepared to fight the war.
If China does go for Taiwan there's going to be a very, very bloody mess on the Taiwanese beaches. And elsewhere in Taiwan, even though the majority of the population is now ethnically Chinese, not Taiwanese. I assume that the Danes (etc) having seen what happened in Caracas are now ready to defend Nuuk again the sort of 'American Commando' attack we saw there.
The biggest mess, unseen by most of us, will be in the electronics factories of Taiwan, and that’s why it’ll be WWIII.
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
How many British weapons require chips from Taiwan?
Am fascinated how little attention the build up of military resources in the gulf is getting here and among wider society. Looks absolutely locked on to me that we’re about to see a regime change war. This time in 2003 there were millions on the streets and it utterly dominated public and private discourse for half a year before it started.
The moment has passed in Iran - had Trump not been so preoccupied with his antics in Venezuela, he might have been able to instigate some precision strikes which might have tipped the balance in favour of the protesters but the protests appear to be reducing as the families bury the dead.
The other issue is what follows the theocracy? I don't know how much support Pahlavi really has - it's impossible to know - and all he's ever said is he sees himself as a transitional figure so what or who follows the mullahs?
Nobody, I suspect, wants a destabilised Iran riven with anarchy and close to open civil war. We know groups at the edges might seek to break from the current state and we have no clue how Russia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq and others will react to a change in the Government in Tehran.
As to public reaction in the event of a co-ordinated attempt to remove the theocrats, it would be interesting to see people dancing on the head of the pin condemning Washington while trying not to support the mullahs but there are wider questions than domestic British political opinion and whether the "right" enjoy the disomfort of the "left" or whether those slavishly loyal to whatever Washington says and does will or would support civilian deaths (accidental).
I’m not so sure. Iran is close to economic collapse, inflation at 50% and rising, and they have no way out without rapprochement with the US and relief from sanctions and isolation.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
You’ve hit the nail on the head - the people who so easily dismiss as “centrist” everyone from socialists like owls and Palmer through hard core Tories like Casino and HY, not to mention our bonnie cadre of Scots Nats, have simply thrown themselves out of the Overton window and are then observing, from their position squished on the gravel driveway of reality, that everyone else seems to be still upstairs.
It would be great to define "centrism" though, and get some polling to work out what topics are included. I guess it would be something that enjoys perhaps 60 - 70% support, but there are significant fringes that are opposed. Using this, Claude gives me:
Increasing number of foreign students
Current levels of skilled immigration
Full staffing the NHS even if it means more immigration
Assisted dying
Closer ties with the EU
The Monarchy
But not included is
Increase bus services (80% support)
Clean rivers (90)
Increase investment in Renewables (over 80)
Rejoin the EU (50)
National Service (28)
Jail Chris Whitty (I would guess less than 5)
The Boriswave (less than 5)
That would absolutely not enjoy 60-70% support.
"Centrist" is said more in hope than reality; most people do not favour liberal internationalism and open borders.
Each of those topics get around 60-70% support on YouGov. I think it's a reasonable approximation for "centrism", if we understand it as a majority but not unanimous opinion.
You seem to be specifically choosing the issues on which majority opinion can be seen to align with you. I'm quite happy to admit I'm in a minority on all sorts of issues.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
It's very gratifying seeing recognition of this fact from some unexpected quarters.
I probably present far more lefist on here than my own personal politics. A natural tendency to contrarianism possibly.
Regardless, I think some of the problems the UK has are not really (party) political in nature - people like the LFG crowd are doing good work & need support from both sides of the political aisles.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
If the US genuinely expect a major confrontation with China why are they doing so much to lose allies in advance of that confrontation?
They’re trying, in a slightly weird way, to get everyone else ready.
If China does go for Taiwan it’s going to be WWIII, and right now only the Americans are prepared to fight the war.
If China does go for Taiwan there's going to be a very, very bloody mess on the Taiwanese beaches. And elsewhere in Taiwan, even though the majority of the population is now ethnically Chinese, not Taiwanese. I assume that the Danes (etc) having seen what happened in Caracas are now ready to defend Nuuk again the sort of 'American Commando' attack we saw there.
The biggest mess, unseen by most of us, will be in the electronics factories of Taiwan, and that’s why it’ll be WWIII.
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
If you know that, the Chinese presumably know it too and they might reason the price of invading Taiwan is simply too high.
The rattling of sabers and the regular threats will continue but it’s just noise.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
The problem is that governments seem to see house prices going down as undoubtedly a bad thing.
They have institutional memory from the early ‘90s which stil hasn’t gone away.
The reality is that house prices can drop 5% in money terms every year for a decade, without anyone on a repayment mortgage experiencing negative equity.
I think house prices are one of those things where it's quite hard to engineer a gentle deflation. I don't think it's a stable regime.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
If the US genuinely expect a major confrontation with China why are they doing so much to lose allies in advance of that confrontation?
They’re trying, in a slightly weird way, to get everyone else ready.
If China does go for Taiwan it’s going to be WWIII, and right now only the Americans are prepared to fight the war.
If China does go for Taiwan there's going to be a very, very bloody mess on the Taiwanese beaches. And elsewhere in Taiwan, even though the majority of the population is now ethnically Chinese, not Taiwanese. I assume that the Danes (etc) having seen what happened in Caracas are now ready to defend Nuuk again the sort of 'American Commando' attack we saw there.
The biggest mess, unseen by most of us, will be in the electronics factories of Taiwan, and that’s why it’ll be WWIII.
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
If you know that, the Chinese presumably know it too and they might reason the price of invading Taiwan is simply too high.
The rattling of sabers and the regular threats will continue but it’s just noise.
Let’s hope so.
The West needs to be prepared for it though, up to and including the same sort of sanctions on China as we see today on Russia.
That means reshoring a lot of production to friendly countries, which is to some extent the method behind the madness of Trump’s tariff policy.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
You’ve hit the nail on the head - the people who so easily dismiss as “centrist” everyone from socialists like owls and Palmer through hard core Tories like Casino and HY, not to mention our bonnie cadre of Scots Nats, have simply thrown themselves out of the Overton window and are then observing, from their position squished on the gravel driveway of reality, that everyone else seems to be still upstairs.
It would be great to define "centrism" though, and get some polling to work out what topics are included. I guess it would be something that enjoys perhaps 60 - 70% support, but there are significant fringes that are opposed. Using this, Claude gives me:
Increasing number of foreign students
Current levels of skilled immigration
Full staffing the NHS even if it means more immigration
Assisted dying
Closer ties with the EU
The Monarchy
But not included is
Increase bus services (80% support)
Clean rivers (90)
Increase investment in Renewables (over 80)
Rejoin the EU (50)
National Service (28)
Jail Chris Whitty (I would guess less than 5)
The Boriswave (less than 5)
Plus same sex marriage but not Trans in female bathrooms
1 all Water bosses to take a dip in british rivers, to see how they like it
2 national service to be introduced for all former prime ministers
3 wifi on trains that works
4 trains that work
5 the reintroduction of ceefax
6 children in need to finally get round to fixing pudsey’s eye
7 traffic on northallerton high street to be fixed by a new space bridge, bypassing both level crossings
8 european countries to be invited to join the uk, creating a new ‘union of europe’, if you will
9 wallace and gromit to be knighted, for services to wensleydale
10 I pledge to build at least one affordable house
11 croissants to be price-capped at £1.10, and 99 flakes to cost 99p
12 national yorkshire pudding day to be a bank holiday (except for banks)
13 loud snacks to be banned from cinemas and theatres
14 pensions to be double-locked, but with a little extra chain on the side
15 claudia winkleman’s fringe to be grade 1-listed
16 new series of gladiators to feature ’90s gladiators against age-appropriate contenders
17 minsters’ pay to be tied to that of nurses for the next 100 years
18 shops that play christmas music before december to be closed down and turned into public libraries
19 to combat the uk’s increasingly wet climate, all british citizens to be offered stilts
20 a ban on speakerphones on public transport. offenders to be forced to live with matt hancock for a year
21 the mini golf course at richmond swimming pool to host the open championship
22 mps to live in the area they wish to serve for 4 years before election, to improve local representation
23 the hand dryer in the gents’ urinals at the crown & treaty, uxbridge to be moved to a more sensible position.
24 count binface to represent the uk at eurovision
Croissants is a weird one, often cheaper to buy 4 than 1 in the same shop. Can buy about 12 from the local supermarket for the same price as one from Gails. Definitely needs a government price cap.
I have a book somewhere which appears to be a scientific treatise on the art of croissant baking, which a friend of my wife's gave me, after she'd been given it by the author who is a baker in her parent's village.
A brief perusal convinced me that anyone who can bake a really good croissant is justified in charging what they like for one, though I have no idea how good the croissants at Gails are.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
You’ve hit the nail on the head - the people who so easily dismiss as “centrist” everyone from socialists like owls and Palmer through hard core Tories like Casino and HY, not to mention our bonnie cadre of Scots Nats, have simply thrown themselves out of the Overton window and are then observing, from their position squished on the gravel driveway of reality, that everyone else seems to be still upstairs.
It would be great to define "centrism" though, and get some polling to work out what topics are included. I guess it would be something that enjoys perhaps 60 - 70% support, but there are significant fringes that are opposed. Using this, Claude gives me:
Increasing number of foreign students
Current levels of skilled immigration
Full staffing the NHS even if it means more immigration
Assisted dying
Closer ties with the EU
The Monarchy
But not included is
Increase bus services (80% support)
Clean rivers (90)
Increase investment in Renewables (over 80)
Rejoin the EU (50)
National Service (28)
Jail Chris Whitty (I would guess less than 5)
The Boriswave (less than 5)
That would absolutely not enjoy 60-70% support.
"Centrist" is said more in hope than reality; most people do not favour liberal internationalism and open borders.
The core of centrism, IMO, is the post WWII social democrat settlement. Centrism comes in flavours and is more than consensus but has a common core. Centrism, as I see it, is serious about avoiding populism (simple answers to complex questions), accepting the democratic process, avoiding authoritarianism, upholding the rule of law and separation of powers, working with an international order, accepts the world is complicated and imperfect, upholds private enterprise but with regulation and a substantial welfare state, doesn't demonise minorities, prefers Adam Smith and David Ricardo to Marx, is fiscally responsible.
It is not based on a long list of micro policies, argument about which is the lifeblood of our party politics. It embraces the overwhelming majority of our MPs. Whether Reform in this sense is centrist is yet to be found out when tested by reality. Personally I think it would be but I am not sure.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
The problem is that governments seem to see house prices going down as undoubtedly a bad thing.
They have institutional memory from the early ‘90s which stil hasn’t gone away.
The reality is that house prices can drop 5% in money terms every year for a decade, without anyone on a repayment mortgage experiencing negative equity.
I think house prices are one of those things where it's quite hard to engineer a gentle deflation. I don't think it's a stable regime.
The trick to it is understanding that most people buying houses are taking a mortgage to do so, which means that demand is a factor of the purchase price, the interest rate, and the deposit requirement, the latter being a function of anticipated future purchase price.
Reminder: The United States did not buy lands only from European powers:
The purchase of the Louisiana Territory led to debates over the idea of indigenous land rights that persisted into the mid 20th century. The many court cases and tribal suits in the 1930s for historical damages flowing from the Louisiana Purchase led to the Indian Claims Commission Act (ICCA) in 1946. Felix S. Cohen, Interior Department lawyer who helped pass ICCA, is often quoted as saying, "practically all of the real estate acquired by the United States since 1776 was purchased not from Napoleon or any other emperor or czar but from its original Indian owners".[3]
In 2017, the total cost to the U.S. government of all subsequent treaties and financial settlements up to the year 2012 for the land acquired in the Louisiana Purchase was estimated to be around $2.6 billion, or $11.4 billion in 2024 dollars.[2][3] This is equivalent to $418 million in 1803 dollars, so the $15 million originally paid to France was roughly 3.5 percent of the total amount paid for this land, to both France and the Indians.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
Facemasks and social distancing are effective at stopping the spread of respiratory diseases. To be contrarian about those for the sake of being contrarian reminds me of the best headline ever to describe similar views currently circulating in the US…
Indeed: one can argue that the costs were greater than the benefits*, but to argue that somehow staying away from other people and wearing masks doesn't reduce the spread of disease displays a starting sense of stupidity.
* Indeed: my schtick for about the last five years is that about 20% of the measures could have had 80% of the benefit. And I think most of the US -and particularly California**- got the balance more right (except on the issue of schools) than the UK.
** Although California did some stupid things too. Like requiring that each alternate chair on the ski lift (as in the one in front of you, not the one next to you) was empty. Meaning that there were masses of people at the bottom of the lift in a huddle, because the capacity of lifts was cut in half. Totally idiotic.
And on the flip side I'll chime in to say fuck masks and fuck lockdown. Any perceived benefits never justified the costs of either of them and society has been permanently and irreparably harmed by both policies as well as everything else that accompanied them like social distancing and furlough.
All of the bureaucrats and scientists need to pay the price for forcing these policies on the country. I hope that if we get a Reform government they'll put the guilty people in jail and throw away the key.
Of course fuck lockdowns: the UK had a shocklingly shit experience.
But the advice given in the US was little different to the advice given in the UK, it's just the politicians chose a different balance.
The idea that you should get people to 'pay a price' is staggering. They existed in an uncertain world, and gave their best answer, aware that if it turned out differently, they might have been responsible for millions of deaths.
Without a reckoning for the guilty parties including and not limited to substantial jail time there will be no deterrent for these bureaucrats and technocrats to take over the running of the country in the next crisis. It is clear that they went well beyond advice and forced their own policies onto the government of the day using media briefings and threats.
I didn't vote for Vallance and Whitty. No one did. During those two years they substantially ran government policy, they were unaccountable to the public and completely untouchable. Fauci similarly so in the US. It wasn't just them though, there was a cottage industry of politicised scientists all attempting to push their own agendas under the guise of "safety" and "save the NHS" which allowed them to reshape the country without a single vote being cast. For two years there was a coup de tat by technocrats and then they had the temerity to clear themselves of any wrongdoing in the subsequent inquiry.
I'm not for a Reform government, yet I will shed no tears if one comes and they put the lot of these usurpers in jail.
In jail for what? Giving their honest view to an elected Government and then implementing instructions?
Do you really think that's all they did? No media briefings, no calls to journalists telling them that if the politicians didn't fall in line that the NHS would collapse, no threats to politicians who disagreed with them, no "monitoring" of social media to use the arms of the state to silence those who disagreed with them under the guise of "unity".
The scientists and bureaucrats perpetrated a silent takeover of the government. No one voted for that. You may argue that people would have voted for it but it was never put to the public.
This is a fantasy in your head. Read the COVID-19 Inquiry for what actually happened. Boris was in charge throughout (well, except when he was in hospital).
MaxPB spends his time whining about PB centrists - but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up. It's a bit deranged tbh, and "the Right" would be insane to take that path rather than the one starting to appear under Badenoch.
On Streeting, I think this perception comes from the fact he's an aggressive and energetic communicator. That's a big contrast with the rest of the government, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's trying to outshine Starmer. It's almost impossible not to.
Polls say you are wrong
40-50% of the country would, right now, vote for Reform or the Greens. That’s not centrism
Similarly, 52% of the country voted for the extremely-non-centrist Brexit
One of the many many faults of middlebrow mediocre centrist dorks, such as those which infest PB, is to glibly presume “everyone is a boring clueless sensible centrist like me”
That's not what I said. What proportion of Brits do you think would support locking up civil servants and scientists from COVID and "throwing away the key"?
You literally said “99% of the country is a centrist”
Fuck me, you've spent too long at the Telegraph
"but 99% of the population is a centrist if you're the kind of person who advocates for locking COVID scientists up"
You’ve hit the nail on the head - the people who so easily dismiss as “centrist” everyone from socialists like owls and Palmer through hard core Tories like Casino and HY, not to mention our bonnie cadre of Scots Nats, have simply thrown themselves out of the Overton window and are then observing, from their position squished on the gravel driveway of reality, that everyone else seems to be still upstairs.
It would be great to define "centrism" though, and get some polling to work out what topics are included. I guess it would be something that enjoys perhaps 60 - 70% support, but there are significant fringes that are opposed. Using this, Claude gives me:
Increasing number of foreign students
Current levels of skilled immigration
Full staffing the NHS even if it means more immigration
Assisted dying
Closer ties with the EU
The Monarchy
But not included is
Increase bus services (80% support)
Clean rivers (90)
Increase investment in Renewables (over 80)
Rejoin the EU (50)
National Service (28)
Jail Chris Whitty (I would guess less than 5)
The Boriswave (less than 5)
Plus same sex marriage but not Trans in female bathrooms
1 all Water bosses to take a dip in british rivers, to see how they like it
2 national service to be introduced for all former prime ministers
3 wifi on trains that works
4 trains that work
5 the reintroduction of ceefax
6 children in need to finally get round to fixing pudsey’s eye
7 traffic on northallerton high street to be fixed by a new space bridge, bypassing both level crossings
8 european countries to be invited to join the uk, creating a new ‘union of europe’, if you will
9 wallace and gromit to be knighted, for services to wensleydale
10 I pledge to build at least one affordable house
11 croissants to be price-capped at £1.10, and 99 flakes to cost 99p
12 national yorkshire pudding day to be a bank holiday (except for banks)
13 loud snacks to be banned from cinemas and theatres
14 pensions to be double-locked, but with a little extra chain on the side
15 claudia winkleman’s fringe to be grade 1-listed
16 new series of gladiators to feature ’90s gladiators against age-appropriate contenders
17 minsters’ pay to be tied to that of nurses for the next 100 years
18 shops that play christmas music before december to be closed down and turned into public libraries
19 to combat the uk’s increasingly wet climate, all british citizens to be offered stilts
20 a ban on speakerphones on public transport. offenders to be forced to live with matt hancock for a year
21 the mini golf course at richmond swimming pool to host the open championship
22 mps to live in the area they wish to serve for 4 years before election, to improve local representation
23 the hand dryer in the gents’ urinals at the crown & treaty, uxbridge to be moved to a more sensible position.
24 count binface to represent the uk at eurovision
Croissants is a weird one, often cheaper to buy 4 than 1 in the same shop. Can buy about 12 from the local supermarket for the same price as one from Gails. Definitely needs a government price cap.
I have a book somewhere which appears to be a scientific treatise on the art of croissant baking, which a friend of my wife's gave me, after she'd been given it by the author who is a baker in her parent's village.
A brief perusal convinced me that anyone who can bake a really good croissant is justified in charging what they like for one, though I have no idea how good the croissants at Gails are.
Imo, the posh ones tend to be better on the inside but not convinced by their outside texture. Not worth 12x a supermarket pack one regardless.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
The problem is that governments seem to see house prices going down as undoubtedly a bad thing.
They have institutional memory from the early ‘90s which stil hasn’t gone away.
The reality is that house prices can drop 5% in money terms every year for a decade, without anyone on a repayment mortgage experiencing negative equity.
I think house prices are one of those things where it's quite hard to engineer a gentle deflation. I don't think it's a stable regime.
The trick to it is understanding that most people buying houses are taking a mortgage to do so, which means that demand is a factor of the purchase price, the interest rate, and the deposit requirement, the latter being a function of anticipated future purchase price.
I've only bought a house twice, and both times I did not currently own a house. Both times I bought a house in a market where house prices were rising faster than general inflation and this creates a sense of urgency for the buyer who isn't currently an owner - if you don't buy asap you will have much higher prices next year. This urgency supports prices increasing as fast as affordability allows.
Once you take that urgency out of the market - as you do when prices are stagnant or falling - then prices are set by the people who have to sell, rather than by the people who feel that they have to buy. So surely there's a tendency for the bottom to fall out of the market once prices are falling?
Perhaps it's the age of the readership. Seems if you are over 50 you think everything is shit.
Half of them think London is a scary place under sharia law. Yet in reality people are still paying half a million for a smallish, standard two bed flat across most boroughs.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
If the US genuinely expect a major confrontation with China why are they doing so much to lose allies in advance of that confrontation?
They’re trying, in a slightly weird way, to get everyone else ready.
If China does go for Taiwan it’s going to be WWIII, and right now only the Americans are prepared to fight the war.
If China does go for Taiwan there's going to be a very, very bloody mess on the Taiwanese beaches. And elsewhere in Taiwan, even though the majority of the population is now ethnically Chinese, not Taiwanese. I assume that the Danes (etc) having seen what happened in Caracas are now ready to defend Nuuk again the sort of 'American Commando' attack we saw there.
The biggest mess, unseen by most of us, will be in the electronics factories of Taiwan, and that’s why it’ll be WWIII.
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
If you know that, the Chinese presumably know it too and they might reason the price of invading Taiwan is simply too high.
The rattling of sabers and the regular threats will continue but it’s just noise.
Let’s hope so.
The West needs to be prepared for it though, up to and including the same sort of sanctions on China as we see today on Russia.
That means reshoring a lot of production to friendly countries, which is to some extent the method behind the madness of Trump’s tariff policy.
Is the west really still functioning? Europeans leaders might care about it but don't have the will or capacity to make it count. Trump just wants to be godfather.
Perhaps it's the age of the readership. Seems if you are over 50 you think everything is shit.
That is fascinating. You definitely get a lot of doom and gloom from the older generation, lots of talking the economy down. And yet it's them who have by far the most disposable income.
From that the best way to get the economy moving is to get those cohorts spending. I think we need to ban negative vibes on facebook.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
If the US genuinely expect a major confrontation with China why are they doing so much to lose allies in advance of that confrontation?
They’re trying, in a slightly weird way, to get everyone else ready.
If China does go for Taiwan it’s going to be WWIII, and right now only the Americans are prepared to fight the war.
If China does go for Taiwan there's going to be a very, very bloody mess on the Taiwanese beaches. And elsewhere in Taiwan, even though the majority of the population is now ethnically Chinese, not Taiwanese. I assume that the Danes (etc) having seen what happened in Caracas are now ready to defend Nuuk again the sort of 'American Commando' attack we saw there.
The biggest mess, unseen by most of us, will be in the electronics factories of Taiwan, and that’s why it’ll be WWIII.
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
How many British weapons require chips from Taiwan?
Good question, which should be high on the list of firms producing weapons right now.
The Ukranian experience is going to need to be studied hard, they’ve managed to make all sorts of new weapons on their own in the past couple of years.
How much of new stuff such as Starlink terminals, for example, is possible with only Western parts?
Hard to imagine the USA without the agricultural powerhouse of the Mississipi Basin and the central states.
Granted, it is in part because it is so big, but I remember a meme about how the USA always seems to find itself with all the great resources it needs, like they discover oil or rare earths whenever they want it (the latter may be less true, IDK), as though they were playing Civililization on easy mode.
Certainly the key to winning at Risk was getting control of north America. Only 3 points of contact (one through Greenland IIRC), a healthy number of armies on each turn, the easy conquest of South America to add a further 2 armies each turn without any further exposure, it really was a no brainer. In contrast trying to defend Europe, Africa or Asia was a nightmare.
Thank you, I shall listen to it later. I was on Prof Spiegelhalter's pub quiz team one night (RSS Glasgow 2017) and you still see his face occasionally in conferences.
i attended a talk by Spiegelhalter in London about a week or so before lockdown and when he was asked about the emerging news from Italy he was quite dismissive, pointing out that the various flu pandemic warnings over the previous few decades had petered out to nothing.
Perhaps it's the age of the readership. Seems if you are over 50 you think everything is shit.
So- how much of that is lived reality (the Starmer government has tilted the relative balance a bit in favour of younger people and against older people, and not before time) and how much of it is different media diets with the papers and rolling news channels talking Britain down because it's profitable for them? Or something else?
So many questions from that graph. I almost wish I were a sociology/politics lecturer who had a bright tutorial group to unpick it with.
Perhaps it's the age of the readership. Seems if you are over 50 you think everything is shit.
So- how much of that is lived reality (the Starmer government has tilted the relative balance a bit in favour of younger people and against older people, and not before time) and how much of it is different media diets with the papers and rolling news channels talking Britain down because it's profitable for them? Or something else?
So many questions from that graph. I almost wish I were a sociology/politics lecturer who had a bright tutorial group to unpick it with.
Thank you, I shall listen to it later. I was on Prof Spiegelhalter's pub quiz team one night (RSS Glasgow 2017) and you still see his face occasionally in conferences.
i attended a talk by Spiegelhalter in London about a week or so before lockdown and when he was asked about the emerging news from Italy he was quite dismissive, pointing out that the various flu pandemic warnings over the previous few decades had petered out to nothing.
The single biggest lesson to learn from the pandemic, is why was there an absolute determination to allow outbound leisure travel at every stage? That should have been the very last thing to be opened up.
Was it the cost of furlough on airlines, insurance companies and travel agents lobbying government, diplomatic pressure from outbound destinations?
Am fascinated how little attention the build up of military resources in the gulf is getting here and among wider society. Looks absolutely locked on to me that we’re about to see a regime change war. This time in 2003 there were millions on the streets and it utterly dominated public and private discourse for half a year before it started.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
If the US genuinely expect a major confrontation with China why are they doing so much to lose allies in advance of that confrontation?
They’re trying, in a slightly weird way, to get everyone else ready.
If China does go for Taiwan it’s going to be WWIII, and right now only the Americans are prepared to fight the war.
If China does go for Taiwan there's going to be a very, very bloody mess on the Taiwanese beaches. And elsewhere in Taiwan, even though the majority of the population is now ethnically Chinese, not Taiwanese. I assume that the Danes (etc) having seen what happened in Caracas are now ready to defend Nuuk again the sort of 'American Commando' attack we saw there.
The biggest mess, unseen by most of us, will be in the electronics factories of Taiwan, and that’s why it’ll be WWIII.
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
If you know that, the Chinese presumably know it too and they might reason the price of invading Taiwan is simply too high.
The rattling of sabers and the regular threats will continue but it’s just noise.
I hope you're right.
BUT - there was a lot of knowing comment, at the time, that the CCP would not crush civil and political rights in Hong Kong because it would be killing the goose that was laying the golden eggs. Look at how that turned out.
My worry is that Xi, like Putin, wants a legacy that includes recovering territory they consider to be in their sphere. They really don't much care about the economics.
Thank you, I shall listen to it later. I was on Prof Spiegelhalter's pub quiz team one night (RSS Glasgow 2017) and you still see his face occasionally in conferences.
i attended a talk by Spiegelhalter in London about a week or so before lockdown and when he was asked about the emerging news from Italy he was quite dismissive, pointing out that the various flu pandemic warnings over the previous few decades had petered out to nothing.
The single biggest lesson to learn from the pandemic, is why was there an absolute determination to allow outbound leisure travel at every stage? That should have been the very last thing to be opened up.
Was it the cost of furlough on airlines, insurance companies and travel agents lobbying government, diplomatic pressure from outbound destinations?
Summer Lollibobs. Which are an Englishman's right under Magna Carta or something.
In Summer 2020, everyone, not just in England, was desperate to convince themselves that the pandemic was over. And there were boffins prepared to wangle the data to show that it was.
However probably about 25% of the USA was purchased from someone else.
Louisiana purchase in 1803 from France and Alaska in 1867 from Russia
The USA's last purchase was the Virgin Islands in 1917 from their old friends Denmark.
The desire to purchase is not what is that weird, it's the obsessive urgent tone about it out of nowhere, even to the point of militarily threatening close allies (there can be no other reasonable description of it) about it which is weird.
It’s not out of no where. You just haven’t been paying attention. Further, the swiftness with which this US admin has been moving on the Panama Canal, Greenland, Venezuela and Iran, gives a rather foreboding feeling about their risk assessment of China.
That assessment might be wrong of course, but I’m reasonably convinced at this point that ceteris paribus they expect a direct confrontation with China, and are taking all steps they can to shape the board ahead of time and/or boost deterrence against a Taiwan event.
Every other analyst is convinced that this is Trump thinking the US gets to do anything it wants in its neighbourhood, Putin gets to do what he wants in his neighbourhood (Ukraine) and therefore China will be given a free hand when it comes to Taiwan.
Perhaps it's the age of the readership. Seems if you are over 50 you think everything is shit.
Wow, what a graph. Reminds me of the one that shows Republicans thinking the economy nosedived the moment Biden was elected.
Yes - excellent stuff from Battlebus fishing that out. Worthy of a header. And not just the recent divergence - COVID not having a particularly big impact on sentiment is very telling indeed. We really protected people during that period.
(I wonder how it compared to the pre-Brexit trend...)
If you want a reckoning around COVID-19, I recommend you read the latest COVID-19 Inquiry report. It lays out events, how decisions were made, in detail, with evidence. Your tax money paid for it, you might as well read it!
Very typical of these sort of things, it’s a very expensive way of analysing what happened in the worst possible way.
Let’s hope the next chapter is better, at looking forward to how government might better deal with the next massive national emergency.
Johnson set the terms of the inquiry and he set them to examine decision making during COVID, so that’s what it’s been doing.
Oh indeed, I just think it’s totally the wrong approach.
Instead of judges and barristers runing the inquiry, at enormous costs and creating more heat than light, they should have hired people from AAIB, RAIB, MAIB, who are used to working through how a bunch of competent and professional people still occasionally get caught up in massive accidents.
you're trying to apply an engineering approach to an non engineering problem
The engineering problem is interesting; the political issues less so. If the purpose of an inquiry is to explore how best to protect us from a future pandemic by identifying what went wrong and what went gangbusters (in the argot of the times) then months of barristers poring over emails will not help. Maybe Chris Whitty was wrong about everything; or perhaps Matt Hancock was so far out of his depth that you cannot even blame him for being wrong. It doesn't matter. The individual decision makers last time have already been replaced. It will be a different lot next time.
Exercise Cygnus in 2016 modelled a pandemic. Many of its conclusions were not acted upon. The Covid pandemic was Cygnus on steroids and its lessons too will be ignored while the inquiry drones on about civil service email exchanges and alt-right pundits wonder about blaming Biden or Fauci or whether it was a bat in the market or a bat in the lab or whether the bat in the market was the bat in the lab. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_Cygnus
Where, next time, will we find hospital beds, PPE, drugs and vaccines? Can we store them, buy them or make them? What behaviour changes will be needed? Will we have better modelling software? Do we need test and trace and if so, can we separate them? Can there be scientists on call to rapidly test assumptions (eg we got everything about droplets wrong last time because the textbooks were wrong).
As a really obvious example, medical gowns. Should we now be buying them, storing them, and using the bottom of the stored pile, with a year’s supply in the store? Do we have companies in the UK with whom we can contract to make more of them in an emergency, and do they have access to stockpiles of the raw materials required?
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
The problem is that governments seem to see house prices going down as undoubtedly a bad thing.
They have institutional memory from the early ‘90s which stil hasn’t gone away.
The reality is that house prices can drop 5% in money terms every year for a decade, without anyone on a repayment mortgage experiencing negative equity.
I think house prices are one of those things where it's quite hard to engineer a gentle deflation. I don't think it's a stable regime.
The trick to it is understanding that most people buying houses are taking a mortgage to do so, which means that demand is a factor of the purchase price, the interest rate, and the deposit requirement, the latter being a function of anticipated future purchase price.
And the amount a borrower can borrow - which is why we had the price increases from 2000 to 2004 as banks moved from their old 3+1 income limits to 3.5x (and now 4.5x) joint income borrowing
Perhaps it's the age of the readership. Seems if you are over 50 you think everything is shit.
So- how much of that is lived reality (the Starmer government has tilted the relative balance a bit in favour of younger people and against older people, and not before time) and how much of it is different media diets with the papers and rolling news channels talking Britain down because it's profitable for them? Or something else?
So many questions from that graph. I almost wish I were a sociology/politics lecturer who had a bright tutorial group to unpick it with.
Looks likely to be the same pattern as seen in the US - an increasing partisan divide on views of the economy. Younger voters are more likely to be Labour voters, so more optimistic with a Labour government and vice versa.
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
A very believable account of what it's like inside the NEU, our largest teaching union. Hard left Palestine fanaticism.
Oh it's the Telegraph...... Fine I await the rebuttal. No doubt the 'liberal right' will be keen to ignore it all as it pertains to a culture war. Ignoring the fact that that is what the hard left is doing, embedding itself as best it can in as many institutions as possible.
There is a problem with the hard left (SWP, in particular) embedding itself in many trades unions. What we need is more people to join unions and vote them out.
Re Lockdown, I found the whole experience demoralising and depressing. I suffered from terrific clinical depression, during the Winter of 2021/22.
I went back to my photos to look at my travel exploits in lockdown. I went to France twice during the Great 2020 Lockdown via the Rotterdam backdoor for EU citizens then a midnight smuggler's run from Belgique into France through the back roads of Wallonie. It was like being part of Réseau Comète. I think I went to the Netherlands again in the second lockdown later that year but don't seem to have records of that.
I did enjoy the Lockdown Subversion groups on FB. I recall one guy got to Istanbul from Brentford. Caught the 'vid there and carked it in the waiting room of a Turkish hospital.
If you want a reckoning around COVID-19, I recommend you read the latest COVID-19 Inquiry report. It lays out events, how decisions were made, in detail, with evidence. Your tax money paid for it, you might as well read it!
Very typical of these sort of things, it’s a very expensive way of analysing what happened in the worst possible way.
Let’s hope the next chapter is better, at looking forward to how government might better deal with the next massive national emergency.
Johnson set the terms of the inquiry and he set them to examine decision making during COVID, so that’s what it’s been doing.
Oh indeed, I just think it’s totally the wrong approach.
Instead of judges and barristers runing the inquiry, at enormous costs and creating more heat than light, they should have hired people from AAIB, RAIB, MAIB, who are used to working through how a bunch of competent and professional people still occasionally get caught up in massive accidents.
you're trying to apply an engineering approach to an non engineering problem
The engineering problem is interesting; the political issues less so. If the purpose of an inquiry is to explore how best to protect us from a future pandemic by identifying what went wrong and what went gangbusters (in the argot of the times) then months of barristers poring over emails will not help. Maybe Chris Whitty was wrong about everything; or perhaps Matt Hancock was so far out of his depth that you cannot even blame him for being wrong. It doesn't matter. The individual decision makers last time have already been replaced. It will be a different lot next time.
Exercise Cygnus in 2016 modelled a pandemic. Many of its conclusions were not acted upon. The Covid pandemic was Cygnus on steroids and its lessons too will be ignored while the inquiry drones on about civil service email exchanges and alt-right pundits wonder about blaming Biden or Fauci or whether it was a bat in the market or a bat in the lab or whether the bat in the market was the bat in the lab. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_Cygnus
Where, next time, will we find hospital beds, PPE, drugs and vaccines? Can we store them, buy them or make them? What behaviour changes will be needed? Will we have better modelling software? Do we need test and trace and if so, can we separate them? Can there be scientists on call to rapidly test assumptions (eg we got everything about droplets wrong last time because the textbooks were wrong).
As a really obvious example, medical gowns. Should we now be buying them, storing them, and using the bottom of the stored pile, with a year’s supply in the store? Do we have companies in the UK with whom we can contract to make more of them in an emergency, and do they have access to stockpiles of the raw materials required?
The problem with disposable PPE is that it has a shelf life. A stockpile wouldn’t turn over fast enough in normal usage, so you’d be throwing away vast quantities each year. So we don’t do that.
Building PPE factories with capacity to produce the quantifies needed and stockpiling raw materials would be expensive. So we don't do that.
Reusable PPE is perfectly possible. Indeed, it can be far more comfortable (blown air is like your own air conditioning) and can be part of modular system that would give full protection against a truly airborne disease. But non-disposable Isn’t How We Do Things. So we don’t do that.
Do for the next pandemic, the exact same problem will happen again.
Leasehold charges + help to buy overhang + Grenfell costs + Grenfell related planning nightmare + Building Safety Regulator total incompetence (file under Grenfell related planning nightmares) are really, really not helping London in particular.
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
The problem is that governments seem to see house prices going down as undoubtedly a bad thing.
They have institutional memory from the early ‘90s which stil hasn’t gone away.
The reality is that house prices can drop 5% in money terms every year for a decade, without anyone on a repayment mortgage experiencing negative equity.
I think house prices are one of those things where it's quite hard to engineer a gentle deflation. I don't think it's a stable regime.
The trick to it is understanding that most people buying houses are taking a mortgage to do so, which means that demand is a factor of the purchase price, the interest rate, and the deposit requirement, the latter being a function of anticipated future purchase price.
And the amount a borrower can borrow - which is why we had the price increases from 2000 to 2004 as banks moved from their old 3+1 income limits to 3.5x (and now 4.5x) joint income borrowing
I think that's only part of the equation - bank of mum and dad is now much more significant too, and the proportion of cash purchases has doubled since 2008 (IIRC). There are now more cash buyers than first-time mortgage buyers, and that's also reflected in the large increase in people renting over the last 20 years or so.
Re Lockdown, I found the whole experience demoralising and depressing. I suffered from terrific clinical depression, during the Winter of 2021/22.
I went back to my photos to look at my travel exploits in lockdown. I went to France twice during the Great 2020 Lockdown via the Rotterdam backdoor for EU citizens then a midnight smuggler's run from Belgique into France through the back roads of Wallonie. It was like being part of Réseau Comète. I think I went to the Netherlands again in the second lockdown later that year but don't seem to have records of that.
I did enjoy the Lockdown Subversion groups on FB. I recall one guy got to Istanbul from Brentford. Caught the 'vid there and carked it in the waiting room of a Turkish hospital.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
A very believable account of what it's like inside the NEU, our largest teaching union. Hard left Palestine fanaticism.
Oh it's the Telegraph...... Fine I await the rebuttal. No doubt the 'liberal right' will be keen to ignore it all as it pertains to a culture war. Ignoring the fact that that is what the hard left is doing, embedding itself as best it can in as many institutions as possible.
There is a problem with the hard left (SWP, in particular) embedding itself in many trades unions. What we need is more people to join unions and vote them out.
Not just vote, but put themselves forward to be branch reps and the like.
Democracy (which includes civil society groups like unions) relies on wide participation. One of the positive features of PB.com are the large number of prime here who are party members, and/or put themselves up for election, etc.
The tendency in recent years to regard democracy/politics as either a spectator/blood sport, or a commercial service, is one of the reasons we're in a spot of bother.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
A very believable account of what it's like inside the NEU, our largest teaching union. Hard left Palestine fanaticism.
Oh it's the Telegraph...... Fine I await the rebuttal. No doubt the 'liberal right' will be keen to ignore it all as it pertains to a culture war. Ignoring the fact that that is what the hard left is doing, embedding itself as best it can in as many institutions as possible.
There is a problem with the hard left (SWP, in particular) embedding itself in many trades unions. What we need is more people to join unions and vote them out.
The trouble is it is the obsessives who go to branch meetings in their own time and find a way to take control.
Whist it may look clever and gives them political leverage they end up being a liability for the left.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
Re Lockdown, I found the whole experience demoralising and depressing. I suffered from terrific clinical depression, during the Winter of 2021/22.
I went back to my photos to look at my travel exploits in lockdown. I went to France twice during the Great 2020 Lockdown via the Rotterdam backdoor for EU citizens then a midnight smuggler's run from Belgique into France through the back roads of Wallonie. It was like being part of Réseau Comète. I think I went to the Netherlands again in the second lockdown later that year but don't seem to have records of that.
I did enjoy the Lockdown Subversion groups on FB. I recall one guy got to Istanbul from Brentford. Caught the 'vid there and carked it in the waiting room of a Turkish hospital.
I remember driving from my hide-out in the British countryside, in lockdown 1, into a totally deserted central London. It was fucking eerie. A few tramps wandered around dying of thirst, on the Strand, literally shouting in pain (they usually rely on cafes and pubs for water). The loudest thing on an otherwise desolate Whitehall was the parakeets. I saw a man in an immaculate suit picking up used cigarette butts. I parked my car sideways on Charing Cross Road (entirely empty) and went into Chinatown where one cafe was open and a man was selling takeaway food while wearing a plastic see through helmet (first one I’d seen)
But the most surreal moment came on the way home, on the very very quiet M4. Everyone was either doing 20mph or about 110mph. Around Swindon I saw a car TOTALLY ON FIRE driving the other way, to London. It wasn’t veering all over the place, it was driving normally, it just happened to be COMPLETELY ON FIRE. The trail of smoke behind it went on for miles
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
'Andrew Rosindell’s head of office has stated that the story has no basis in fact.
In addition to dismissing the story, I was asked to remove it, as it had caused significant issues for Andrew Rosindell and his team. I was also informed that the Conservative Party Chief Whip had been in contact with Mr Rosindell regarding the matter.' https://x.com/CharlieSimpsonA/status/2012531253661057132?s=20
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
it would be the biggest setback for Conservative Islam in many decades. Indeed, a calamity. At the same time it could be the beginning of an Islamic version of the Enlightenment, which is long overdue. Let’s hope it happens
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
It's an exclusive from an independent journalist on Twitter who is 15 or 16 years old.
Quite a coup for them if accurate, but I'm not sure what track record they have.
This seems to be the first story they've posted on Twitter that isn't polling or reporting someone else's story, so they literally have no track record.
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
it would be the biggest setback for Conservative Islam in many decades. Indeed, a calamity. At the same time it could be the beginning of an Islamic version of the Enlightenment, which is long overdue. Let’s hope it happens
Perhaps but Iran is Shia Islam, most of Islam is Sunni
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
it would be the biggest setback for Conservative Islam in many decades. Indeed, a calamity. At the same time it could be the beginning of an Islamic version of the Enlightenment, which is long overdue. Let’s hope it happens
Perhaps but Iran is Shia Islam, most of Islam is Sunni
That distinction would be irrelevant in the overall scheme. Iran has been a primary driver, funder and motivator of militant, violent Islam for decades. Besides being a truly disgusting regime in itself. It supports Hezbollah and Hamas (and allies with Putin, and China, of course)
It is arguably the most repulsive regime on the planet, given the amazing nation it purports to govern. I’d not be that upset if Trump dropped a tactical nuke and took out the mullahs, in toto
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
it would be the biggest setback for Conservative Islam in many decades. Indeed, a calamity. At the same time it could be the beginning of an Islamic version of the Enlightenment, which is long overdue. Let’s hope it happens
Perhaps but Iran is Shia Islam, most of Islam is Sunni
That distinction would be irrelevant in the overall scheme. Iran has been a primary driver, funder and motivator of militant, violent Islam for decades. Besides being a truly disgusting regime in itself. It supports Hezbollah and Hamas (and allies with Putin, and China, of course)
It is arguably the most repulsive regime on the planet, given the amazing nation it purports to govern. I’d not be that upset if Trump dropped a tactical nuke and took out the mullahs, in toto
Clearly it is a repulsive regime but now Assad, Saddam and Gaddaffi have fallen anyway even if it did go, while that would be positive, I don't think it would change any of the neighbouring regimes like the House of Saud, Erdogan or the Taliban and their grip on power in their Sunni nations
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
It's an exclusive from an independent journalist on Twitter who is 15 or 16 years old.
Quite a coup for them if accurate, but I'm not sure what track record they have.
This seems to be the first story they've posted on Twitter that isn't polling or reporting someone else's story, so they literally have no track record.
Otherwise they seem to be a fan of Rupert Lowe.
I would treat the story with caution.
I didn't go back far enough. They've apparently reported this defection before.
It might happen - it wouldn't be a surprise - but I don't think people should be accepting this guy's word for it uncritically.
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
it would be the biggest setback for Conservative Islam in many decades. Indeed, a calamity. At the same time it could be the beginning of an Islamic version of the Enlightenment, which is long overdue. Let’s hope it happens
Perhaps but Iran is Shia Islam, most of Islam is Sunni
Indeed. Conservative Muslim Saudi Arabia, conservative Muslim Afghanistan and what’s left of Islamic State would all be over the moon to see regime change in Iran.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
it would be the biggest setback for Conservative Islam in many decades. Indeed, a calamity. At the same time it could be the beginning of an Islamic version of the Enlightenment, which is long overdue. Let’s hope it happens
Perhaps but Iran is Shia Islam, most of Islam is Sunni
Indeed. Conservative Muslim Saudi Arabia, conservative Muslim Afghanistan and what’s left of Islamic State would all be over the moon to see regime change in Iran.
I'm not sure that is what they want. I certainly don't think they want Pahlavi.
'EXCLUSIVE: MP Andrew Rosindell has reached an agreement to defect to Reform UK.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
Quite a bit can be said about Rosindell, but like Zahawi and Jenrick he is not the most shining example of the sort of 'Tory big beast' who would be an eye catching coup for Reform.
To my jaundiced eye by far the most noteworthy catches are Montgomerie and Kruger. If I had to guess, I would think that they are both wondering daily how important it is that a man is known by the company he keeps.
I think I've heard Blair say in the past that an Iranian government more in line with the beliefs of its people would be transformative for the region. Which presumably means the rest of the region, from the Arab world to Afghanistan and Pakistan would want to stop it.
it would be the biggest setback for Conservative Islam in many decades. Indeed, a calamity. At the same time it could be the beginning of an Islamic version of the Enlightenment, which is long overdue. Let’s hope it happens
Perhaps but Iran is Shia Islam, most of Islam is Sunni
Indeed. Conservative Muslim Saudi Arabia, conservative Muslim Afghanistan and what’s left of Islamic State would all be over the moon to see regime change in Iran.
I'm not sure that is what they want. I certainly don't think they want Pahlavi.
The Taliban and IS want all Shi’ites wiped out, but they’d settle for their old enemy to be brought down. Saudi Arabia probably has more care for stability and the long-term, but will be happy to see a radical Shi’a government replaced with something more moderate. With Iran weakened, they can increase their influence in Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, Yemen etc.
Re Lockdown, I found the whole experience demoralising and depressing. I suffered from terrific clinical depression, during the Winter of 2021/22.
I’m so sorry to hear that, and if it helps, as did I. You are not alone. Lockdown also saw the end of my 15 year marriage, the loss of my house and losing day to day contact with my son. And I was lucky in that I still had a job and could afford to adapt and pay the bills.
But everyday I thank those who know much more than me, are more intelligent, more compassionate that thousands of those who were due to die soon anyway were saved.
Re Lockdown, I found the whole experience demoralising and depressing. I suffered from terrific clinical depression, during the Winter of 2021/22.
I’m so sorry to hear that, and if it helps, as did I. You are not alone. Lockdown also saw the end of my 15 year marriage, the loss of my house and losing day to day contact with my son. And I was lucky in that I still had a job and could afford to adapt and pay the bills.
But everyday I thank those who know much more than me, are more intelligent, more compassionate that thousands of those who were due to die soon anyway were saved.
Re Lockdown, I found the whole experience demoralising and depressing. I suffered from terrific clinical depression, during the Winter of 2021/22.
I’m so sorry to hear that, and if it helps, as did I. You are not alone. Lockdown also saw the end of my 15 year marriage, the loss of my house and losing day to day contact with my son. And I was lucky in that I still had a job and could afford to adapt and pay the bills.
But everyday I thank those who know much more than me, are more intelligent, more compassionate that thousands of those who were due to die soon anyway were saved.
I still believe none of the lockdowns should have happened, with vulnerable people being able to choose to stay at home if they so wished.
But did you believe it at the time ?
We know Keir Starmer thought and repeatedly admonished Boris for not being restrictive enough. To that extent he is a true follower of Ed Davey. Quite capable of having two diametrically opposing views at the same time and always just happening to only remember one of them afterwards.
With the benefit of hindsight we should have closed the borders mid November. But we didn't. So here we are and I have a 20% loss in lung capacity and I'm one of the lucky ones.
Comments
There’s nothing the Government can do about Help To Buy (apart from not do any more of it), but everything else is within this Government’s power to fix with a wave of their regulatory wand, yet they seem comlpetely incapable of doing so.
& it’s not just this Government either - the Tories were unable to fix leasehold despite their huge majority. It seems the UK state itself conspires to prevent reform - it only knows how to layer on fresh regulation.
I was thinking of IDS . Only Redwood, ofcourse, would have the gravitas to match big beasts already in Reform, such as Sir Robert Jenrick, or Sir Jake Berry.
Shudders...
Sometimes, people are simply too neurotic to listen, and you'll be punished for not reading the room.
A very believable account of what it's like inside the NEU, our largest teaching union. Hard left Palestine fanaticism.
Oh it's the Telegraph...... Fine I await the rebuttal. No doubt the 'liberal right' will be keen to ignore it all as it pertains to a culture war. Ignoring the fact that that is what the hard left is doing, embedding itself as best it can in as many institutions as possible.
How can Grenfell costs (i.e. putting fire retardant cladding on properties where it should have been in place in the first place) be fixed via a magic wand - it's a money (i.e. who is paying for the "screw up" by procurement in the building firm) and time (limited labour resources) issue.
As for leasehold - it's going to be years, because there will be multiple court cases as soon as the Government works out how they can fix things.
2 national service to be introduced for all former prime ministers
3 wifi on trains that works
4 trains that work
5 the reintroduction of ceefax
6 children in need to finally get round to fixing pudsey’s eye
7 traffic on northallerton high street to be fixed by a new space bridge, bypassing both level crossings
8 european countries to be invited to join the uk, creating a new ‘union of europe’, if you will
9 wallace and gromit to be knighted, for services to wensleydale
10 I pledge to build at least one affordable house
11 croissants to be price-capped at £1.10, and 99 flakes to cost 99p
12 national yorkshire pudding day to be a bank holiday (except for banks)
13 loud snacks to be banned from cinemas and theatres
14 pensions to be double-locked, but with a little extra chain on the side
15 claudia winkleman’s fringe to be grade 1-listed
16 new series of gladiators to feature ’90s gladiators against age-appropriate contenders
17 minsters’ pay to be tied to that of nurses for the next 100 years
18 shops that play christmas music before december to be closed down and turned into public libraries
19 to combat the uk’s increasingly wet climate, all british citizens to be offered stilts
20 a ban on speakerphones on public transport. offenders to be forced to live with matt hancock for a year
21 the mini golf course at richmond swimming pool to host the open championship
22 mps to live in the area they wish to serve for 4 years before election, to improve local representation
23 the hand dryer in the gents’ urinals at the crown & treaty, uxbridge to be moved to a more sensible position.
24 count binface to represent the uk at eurovision
The factory owners absolutely intend to destroy them rather than allow them to be captured, and their loss will quite literally set the world back years in terms of chips and computers. Think about what happened after the pandemic with millions of unfinished cars, and raise that up to 11.
By contrast the Taliban are back in power in Afghanistan and Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan not there
WRT Covid everyone forgets that the ritualistic clapping was actually supposed to be for carers i.e those putting themselves in harms' way early on in the pandemic when we had little idea how deadly the virus was and before the vaccines were available. Only later on did the NHS lobby make it about themselves.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15470959/My-extraordinary-weekend-Trump-talking-royals-Hes-unlike-nursing-home-Biden-says-ROBERT-HARDMAN-gave-views-Ukraine-Popes-war-just-one-telling-one-thing-didnt-say.html
They have institutional memory from the early ‘90s which stil hasn’t gone away.
The reality is that house prices can drop 5% in money terms every year for a decade, without anyone on a repayment mortgage experiencing negative equity.
Regardless, I think some of the problems the UK has are not really (party) political in nature - people like the LFG crowd are doing good work & need support from both sides of the political aisles.
The rattling of sabers and the regular threats will continue but it’s just noise.
The West needs to be prepared for it though, up to and including the same sort of sanctions on China as we see today on Russia.
That means reshoring a lot of production to friendly countries, which is to some extent the method behind the madness of Trump’s tariff policy.
A brief perusal convinced me that anyone who can bake a really good croissant is justified in charging what they like for one, though I have no idea how good the croissants at Gails are.
It is not based on a long list of micro policies, argument about which is the lifeblood of our party politics. It embraces the overwhelming majority of our MPs. Whether Reform in this sense is centrist is yet to be found out when tested by reality. Personally I think it would be but I am not sure.
Trump and Trumpism isn't centrist.
I see it is ‘the most read’ in The Spectator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase
Once you take that urgency out of the market - as you do when prices are stagnant or falling - then prices are set by the people who have to sell, rather than by the people who feel that they have to buy. So surely there's a tendency for the bottom to fall out of the market once prices are falling?
From that the best way to get the economy moving is to get those cohorts spending. I think we need to ban negative vibes on facebook.
The Ukranian experience is going to need to be studied hard, they’ve managed to make all sorts of new weapons on their own in the past couple of years.
How much of new stuff such as Starlink terminals, for example, is possible with only Western parts?
So many questions from that graph. I almost wish I were a sociology/politics lecturer who had a bright tutorial group to unpick it with.
Was it the cost of furlough on airlines, insurance companies and travel agents lobbying government, diplomatic pressure from outbound destinations?
BUT - there was a lot of knowing comment, at the time, that the CCP would not crush civil and political rights in Hong Kong because it would be killing the goose that was laying the golden eggs. Look at how that turned out.
My worry is that Xi, like Putin, wants a legacy that includes recovering territory they consider to be in their sphere. They really don't much care about the economics.
In Summer 2020, everyone, not just in England, was desperate to convince themselves that the pandemic was over. And there were boffins prepared to wangle the data to show that it was.
(I wonder how it compared to the pre-Brexit trend...)
I did enjoy the Lockdown Subversion groups on FB. I recall one guy got to Istanbul from Brentford. Caught the 'vid there and carked it in the waiting room of a Turkish hospital.
Building PPE factories with capacity to produce the quantifies needed and stockpiling raw materials would be expensive. So we don't do that.
Reusable PPE is perfectly possible. Indeed, it can be far more comfortable (blown air is like your own air conditioning) and can be part of modular system that would give full protection against a truly airborne disease. But non-disposable Isn’t How We Do Things. So we don’t do that.
Do for the next pandemic, the exact same problem will happen again.
The Romford Member of Parliament has come to an arrangement with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage regarding his defection to the party.
Negotiations between the two have been ongoing for several months. Mr. Rosindell was expected to switch parties a few months ago but had to postpone due to an issue concerning his constituency office.
The MP is working to secure ownership of his constituency office, a process he nearly completed several months ago, but the agreement was ultimately not finalised.
The property is currently owned by the Conservative Party and holds significant importance for him. Mr. Farage has agreed to make an exception, allowing Mr. Rosindell to finalise his defection after the May 7 deadline if he has not secured ownership of Margaret Thatcher House by that date.
Sources close to both Mr. Rosindell and Mr. Farage suggest that the defection could now occur within a matter of weeks.'
https://x.com/CharlieSimpsonA/status/2012506529690222611?s=20
Democracy (which includes civil society groups like unions) relies on wide participation. One of the positive features of PB.com are the large number of prime here who are party members, and/or put themselves up for election, etc.
The tendency in recent years to regard democracy/politics as either a spectator/blood sport, or a commercial service, is one of the reasons we're in a spot of bother.
Whist it may look clever and gives them political leverage they end up being a liability for the left.
Quite a coup for them if accurate, but I'm not sure what track record they have.
Beat City 2 - 0 with 3 disallowed goals and hitting the bar twice
What a gift to Arsenal
Bits of the story don't hang entirely straight, but I guess you never know,
Presumably Andy and Nige either confirm or deny now.
But the most surreal moment came on the way home, on the very very quiet M4. Everyone was either doing 20mph or about 110mph. Around Swindon I saw a car TOTALLY ON FIRE driving the other way, to London. It wasn’t veering all over the place, it was driving normally, it just happened to be COMPLETELY ON FIRE. The trail of smoke behind it went on for miles
Perhaps the driver was you @Dura_Ace
In addition to dismissing the story, I was asked to remove it, as it had caused significant issues for Andrew Rosindell and his team. I was also informed that the Conservative Party Chief Whip had been in contact with Mr Rosindell regarding the matter.'
https://x.com/CharlieSimpsonA/status/2012531253661057132?s=20
He added that he does not want to be the leader of a political party himself'
https://x.com/GBPolitcs/status/2012306154391527440?s=20
Otherwise they seem to be a fan of Rupert Lowe.
I would treat the story with caution.
It is arguably the most repulsive regime on the planet, given the amazing nation it purports to govern. I’d not be that upset if Trump dropped a tactical nuke and took out the mullahs, in toto
It might happen - it wouldn't be a surprise - but I don't think people should be accepting this guy's word for it uncritically.
She is listening to what I told her to do today.
To my jaundiced eye by far the most noteworthy catches are Montgomerie and Kruger. If I had to guess, I would think that they are both wondering daily how important it is that a man is known by the company he keeps.
But everyday I thank those who know much more than me, are more intelligent, more compassionate that thousands of those who were due to die soon anyway were saved.
Never again. Never again.
We know Keir Starmer thought and repeatedly admonished Boris for not being restrictive enough. To that extent he is a true follower of Ed Davey. Quite capable of having two diametrically opposing views at the same time and always just happening to only remember one of them afterwards.
With the benefit of hindsight we should have closed the borders mid November. But we didn't. So here we are and I have a 20% loss in lung capacity and I'm one of the lucky ones.