I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
There is no indication at all Starmer will fold for Trump, he has not even allowed the RAF to launch offensive actions against Iranian military sites as Kemi wants let alone allow the US to use UK bases for that
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
I would hope we would both prefer Boris to hard left Rayner
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
I am no supporter of Starmer and Reeves for that matter, but to justify replacing either or both you need a better choice than Rayner
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
My wife comes from fishwife stock in Arbroath and Auchmithy. Strong independent women who worked with their men in a tough trade, who knew their own mind and were not shy in expressing it. Any man would be fortunate to share their life with such a woman. I certainly have been.
This fad about naming things about Queen Elizabeth II will be seen as a disaster soon, might as well start naming stuff after Peter Mandelson.
Andrew ‘caused deeper royal crisis than Edward VIII’s abdication’
Mountbatten-Windsor’s biographer claims that the late Queen’s second son ran rings around his ‘gaga’ mother in the last years of her life
The crisis facing the royal family over the Epstein files revelations about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is more serious than the abdication of Edward VIII, the author of the former prince’s biography has claimed.
Andrew Lownie, author of Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York, said that Mountbatten-Windsor’s actions had caused greater public anger than the abdication crisis, when the king stepped down from his role to marry the American divorcee Wallis Simpson.
Speaking at Oxford Literary Festival, Lownie said the abdication had been a “three-day wonder”, the full details of which the general public did not engage with at the time. He also said that Edward’s support of the Nazi party had yet to become common knowledge.
While Edward resigned voluntarily from his role to marry the woman he loved, Andrew had to be stripped of his HRH title and military honours after allegations about his continued relationship with the billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein re-emerged.
Lownie said the late Queen had “crossed the line” legally “a lot” when she made allowances for Andrew, who it is thought was her favourite child.
“By the end of her life, what people don’t realise, is that she was completely gaga. He [Andrew] would go up there and he would bully her into doing things. So for the last few years of her life Charles actually was running the show, rather than the Queen,” he said.
“There were MI6 officers who went to [royal] private secretaries and said, ‘Look he’s been caught with $5 million in a suitcase in Kazakhstan’, and they were sent away with a flea in their ear. The heads of the foreign office went and complained.
“He was made a vice-admiral in the navy, and that was after these allegations. She [the Queen] entertained a lot of these people. President Aliyev of Azerbaijan gave her a horse and she was thrilled.
“She, I’m afraid, abetted this. The whole family abetted this — they knew about it,” he said.
He added that people in royal circles had been talking about the allegations since 2011.
On one hand it says Charles was running things yet Andrew still seems to have been tolerated and "promoted".
So naming anything after the Queen and Charles looks equally problematic...
Mind you my viewpoint is that a neutered Monarchy is better than an elected Head of State so roll on William and George...
Lownie is now clearly anti monarchy but yes he completely contradicts himself, on the one hand saying Andrew controlled the late Queen and on the other Prince Charles was already running the show.
The comparison with Edward VIII also doesn't hold, he was sovereign unlike Andrew and Edward remained Duke of Windsor to the end of his life whereas Andrew has been stripped of his Duke of York title, even if both were promiscious
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
It’s bad enough the high fuel price but if we get shortages on top of that then we really are screwed .
Trump has done nothing but try and fxck the global economy with his tariffs and now this madness .
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
I would hope we would both prefer Boris to hard left Rayner
It does not come into the equation and anyway I would not want either
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
Yeah. if things really kick up a few gears this week then all hell is going to break loose in the economy.
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
My wife comes from fishwife stock in Arbroath and Auchmithy. Strong independent women who worked with their men in a tough trade, who knew their own mind and were not shy in expressing it. Any man would be fortunate to share their life with such a woman. I certainly have been.
I have no doubt your good, lady, wife would have no qualms about telling Trump "to do one" too.. Perhaps one of Starmer's manifold faults is he is no "fishwife". Is this morning's Cobra meeting a confirmation of capitulation?
Are there are any Muslim/Christian/Hindu/Sikh/Buddhist/Mormon/Jedi ambulances living in the UK?
Yes.
Lots of private ambulances - and since religion and medical charity go together...
Something that many people don't know - most of the "ambulances" in the UK are not zooming around with blue lights, getting the critically ill to hospital in under x minutes.
The vast majority are mini-buses (with adaptions for the less able, often) moving the sick and elderly at a more sedate pace. It's a vital job, but far less sexy.
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
Yes
Happy Armageddon Day, PB
BRACE
If Trump uses nukes he would assume the Strait reopens. Do you think he'll mark his moment in history?
I’m definitely sensing a change in the feeling amongst Labour about removing Starmer.
I don’t think he goes after May.
Depends entirely on what happens in May, assuming Reform win most votes and seats then whichever of Kemi's Tories or Starmer Labour comes second will see their leader survive. If Labour are third or worse though Rayner will almost certainly launch a leadership challenge against Starmer, if the Tories are third or worse Kemi will almost certainly face a VONC from Tory MPs and be replaced by Cleverly if she loses it
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
I am no supporter of Starmer and Reeves for that matter, but to justify replacing either or both you need a better choice than Rayner
10 year bond rate is at 5.06% this morning
An 18 year high
The sad truth is that as Britain goes into this new crisis we are about as poorly prepared as it's possible to be. We have both a crushing amount of debt and public services and infrastructure impoverished to the point of crumbling failure. We haven't stored oil and gas - we can't even refine the former.
Hopefully we have a blazing summer ahead of us because there are few other things to look forward to.
Politically? Starmer is safe. A technocrat is what you need when chaos surrounds you. Also, this is good news for the Tories and bad news for both Reform and the Greens. Upending the system in a populist revolution is something you do when times are good, not when your focus is on immediate things like paying your bills.
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
There is no indication at all Starmer will fold for Trump, he has not even allowed the RAF to launch offensive actions against Iranian military sites as Kemi wants let alone allow the US to use UK bases for that
He banned offensive strikes.
But what about slightly rude strikes?
That annoying-in-the-edging-to-psoition-to-get-on-the-train-before-people-in-the-queue-kind-of-way-strikes?
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
My wife comes from fishwife stock in Arbroath and Auchmithy. Strong independent women who worked with their men in a tough trade, who knew their own mind and were not shy in expressing it. Any man would be fortunate to share their life with such a woman. I certainly have been.
As does my Lossiemouth wife of 62 years and a history going back generations to this disaster
Are there are any Muslim/Christian/Hindu/Sikh/Buddhist/Mormon/Jedi ambulances living in the UK?
Yes.
Lots of private ambulances - and since religion and medical charity go together...
Something that many people don't know - most of the "ambulances" in the UK are not zooming around with blue lights, getting the critically ill to hospital in under x minutes.
The vast majority are mini-buses (with adaptions for the less able, often) moving the sick and elderly at a more sedate pace. It's a vital job, but far less sexy.
I generally associate (Muslim) private ambulances for getting a body ready for a funeral/taking the body to the cemetery.
Like Jews, Muslims are very quick in burying the dead.
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
Yes
Happy Armageddon Day, PB
BRACE
If Trump uses nukes he would assume the Strait reopens. Do you think he'll mark his moment in history?
IF he does it then two consequences accruing therefrom will be...
Russia will use one in the SMO. Maybe a 'test' detonation over the Black Sea. One or more Western governments will fall in the subsequent economic depression. And possibly not peacefully.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
My wife comes from fishwife stock in Arbroath and Auchmithy. Strong independent women who worked with their men in a tough trade, who knew their own mind and were not shy in expressing it. Any man would be fortunate to share their life with such a woman. I certainly have been.
I have no doubt your good, lady, wife would have no qualms about telling Trump "to do one" too.. Perhaps one of Starmer's manifold faults is he is no "fishwife". Is this morning's Cobra meeting a confirmation of capitulation?
Fishwife is a derogatory term as you can see from both @DavidL and my wives heritage, and indeed they were amongst the most hard working women in their communities
I’m properly worrying now, as it seems - finally - are equity markets. We have an unusual situation: a war with no obvious exit-route, no obvious way either side can win (or lose), no logic, and at a time global energy supply is already constrained by one of the biggest producers - Russia - having already taken itself beyond the pale 4 years ago.
Why can’t we have a rest from these relentless global crises? Just a decade of calm. In 20 years we’ve had the worst global financial crises since the 20s, a Eurozone sovereign debt crisis, decadal civil wars in Syria and Iraq and an insurgent caliphate triggering a huge refugee crisis, 4 years of Brexit upheaval, the worst global pandemic since Spanish flu, a Russian invasion of the world’s breadbasket and the cutting off of gas to Europe, a long running Houthi threat to shipping in the Red Sea, and now this.
That’s not even mentioning the natural disasters that had economic impacts, like the Japanese tsunami and wide scale droughts and wildfires. And guess what, we’re getting an El Niño this year. Typically inflationary and with a negative impact on global GDP.
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
I am no supporter of Starmer and Reeves for that matter, but to justify replacing either or both you need a better choice than Rayner
10 year bond rate is at 5.06% this morning
An 18 year high
Channelling my inner Daily Telegraph, Starmer and Reeves fans please explain.
Decent analysis from Pippa Crerar of the local election voting situation. All conclusions familiar to PB volk. No fresh insights. 'Anyone but Labour' v 'Anyone but Reform' is a main bout, but plenty of left of centre people don't want either. Tories hardly get a mention. No-one knows anything much. It won't be a good night for Labour.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on cheap Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
I am no supporter of Starmer and Reeves for that matter, but to justify replacing either or both you need a better choice than Rayner
10 year bond rate is at 5.06% this morning
An 18 year high
Channelling my inner Daily Telegraph, Starmer and Reeves fans please explain.
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
Yes
Happy Armageddon Day, PB
BRACE
If Trump uses nukes he would assume the Strait reopens. Do you think he'll mark his moment in history?
IF he does it then two consequences accruing therefrom will be...
Russia will use one in the SMO. Maybe a 'test' detonation over the Black Sea. One or more Western governments will fall in the subsequent economic depression. And possibly not peacefully.
That would all work for Russia. Trump and Putin are desperate for liberal democratic governments to be replaced with authoritarian ones. Russia is no longer reliant on the West so wouldn't they be insulated from, excuse the pun, the fallout?
Farage rapidly heading for Keir Starmer levels. Starmer seems no uptick with YouGov.
Polanski falls 6 points with YouGov.
Overall things are looking good for Tories.
That is a good poll for Kemi, also for Davey and Polanski if they can get their candidates perceived as the main alternative to Farage's Reform in May not Labour they could prosper with anti Reform votes. Only Starmer is less popular than Farage still so he remains a drag for Labour
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
My wife comes from fishwife stock in Arbroath and Auchmithy. Strong independent women who worked with their men in a tough trade, who knew their own mind and were not shy in expressing it. Any man would be fortunate to share their life with such a woman. I certainly have been.
I have no doubt your good, lady, wife would have no qualms about telling Trump "to do one" too.. Perhaps one of Starmer's manifold faults is he is no "fishwife". Is this morning's Cobra meeting a confirmation of capitulation?
Fishwife is a derogatory term as you can see from both @DavidL and my wives heritage, and indeed they were amongst the most hard working women in their communities
It’s just his unfunny, affected, self pitying style. He doesn’t really think of her as a fishwife, he’s parodying a caricature of people he disagrees with.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
They still are peerless in many ways, no other country could project 5% of the firepower into the Gulf that the US has in the last four weeks.
There is something else going on with the Hormuz other than the drone threat, but I don't know what it is. The Iraqis, with technical and doctrinal support from the French, struggled to sink tankers with fucking Excocets during the 'Tanker War' of the mid 80s. The USN could and would secure the strait if ordered to, but they have not been ordered to. Maybe Trump is very reluctant to take any significant amount of casualties or lose a ship.
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
I am no supporter of Starmer and Reeves for that matter, but to justify replacing either or both you need a better choice than Rayner
10 year bond rate is at 5.06% this morning
An 18 year high
Channelling my inner Daily Telegraph, Starmer and Reeves fans please explain.
Grow up - at times you are just childish
This is a disaster for our country
This is not time for partisan shenanigans. Go fight local election / Welsh / Scottish elections if that's people's desire.
Nationally? We all hang together or we all hang separately.
Same with alliances. Every time I read / hear someone foam on about the EU and betraying Brexit I just laugh.
Farage rapidly heading for Keir Starmer levels. Starmer seems no uptick with YouGov.
Polanski falls 6 points with YouGov.
Overall things are looking good for Tories.
That is a good poll for Kemi, also for Davey and Polanski if they can get their candidates perceived as the main alternative to Farage's Reform in May not Labour they could prosper with anti Reform votes. Only Starmer is less popular than Farage still so he remains a drag for Labour
On that basis Farage is a drag for Reform as he’s rapidly approaching Starmer unpopularity.
Polanski is down 6 points. The more people see the less they like.
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
Costco (Cheapest diesel around £1.579 this morning for me), that's the one you have to pay £35 a year membership toward; Junction 33 of the M1 where they've been retailing it for around £1.80 or so had the signs up that they were out of diesel.
Farage rapidly heading for Keir Starmer levels. Starmer seems no uptick with YouGov.
Polanski falls 6 points with YouGov.
Overall things are looking good for Tories.
That is a good poll for Kemi, also for Davey and Polanski if they can get their candidates perceived as the main alternative to Farage's Reform in May not Labour they could prosper with anti Reform votes. Only Starmer is less popular than Farage still so he remains a drag for Labour
Decent analysis from Pippa Crerar of the local election voting situation. All conclusions familiar to PB volk. No fresh insights. 'Anyone but Labour' v 'Anyone but Reform' is a main bout, but plenty of left of centre people don't want either. Tories hardly get a mention. No-one knows anything much. It won't be a good night for Labour.
Interesting in terms of who voters would vote against by party preference. 56% of Labour voters, 63% of LDs and 79% of Greens would mainly vote against Reform candidates. 68% of Reform voters would mainly vote against Labour candidates.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
They still are peerless in many ways, no other country could project 5% of the firepower into the Gulf that the US has in the last four weeks.
There is something else going on with the Hormuz other than the drone threat, but I don't know what it is. The Iraqis, with technical and doctrinal support from the French, struggled to sink tankers with fucking Excocets during the 'Tanker War' of the mid 80s. The USN could and would secure the strait if ordered to, but they have not been ordered to. Maybe Trump is very reluctant to take any significant amount of casualties or lose a ship.
For all his many faults, Trump knows what putting people on the ground means, and it’s many transport aircraft arriving back in the US carrying flag-draped coffins. He’s does at least appear pretty determined to avoid that.
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
I am no supporter of Starmer and Reeves for that matter, but to justify replacing either or both you need a better choice than Rayner
10 year bond rate is at 5.06% this morning
An 18 year high
The sad truth is that as Britain goes into this new crisis we are about as poorly prepared as it's possible to be. We have both a crushing amount of debt and public services and infrastructure impoverished to the point of crumbling failure. We haven't stored oil and gas - we can't even refine the former.
Hopefully we have a blazing summer ahead of us because there are few other things to look forward to.
Politically? Starmer is safe. A technocrat is what you need when chaos surrounds you. Also, this is good news for the Tories and bad news for both Reform and the Greens. Upending the system in a populist revolution is something you do when times are good, not when your focus is on immediate things like paying your bills.
“Upending the system in a populist revolution is something you do when times are good”
Unless you are in the BreakTheSystem mood. See Brexit.
A lot of people on the left and right are in that place. There was a rather good piece in the Guardian about Lincolnshire. The whole place is heading Reform. One of the putative reasons is planning - houses, solar farms. The locals haven’t been politically engaged on either - true lots of NIMBYIsm. But the push back against NIMBYism in a democracy has to be a sales pitch. Simple fiat imposition from the centre provokes what is happening.
The locals see the usual giant house builders building crap they can’t afford, without extra services. So they get years of disruption and an effective reduction in hospitals, schools etc. To add to the fun, the religious belief in the Evil of Roads, means congestion. And the active reduction in car parking makes that worse as well.
On the solar farms, it seems that a number of projects are fencing off the fields. Even having rights of way closed.
I am In favour of both house building and solar farms. But we must do better in a democracy that simply announce “you are over ruled”
The answer to everything taking a decade to plan, is not to remove all rules (and Process). It is to devise a process that is quicker and meets the real issues that development brings locally.
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
Here's what one particular PB analyst wrote about Trump2 in Feb last year:
Yet it seems that the world must proceed directly to economic disaster and/or the use of nuclear weapons (no passing Go and no collecting £200) rather than actually see if Hormuz can be sailed through.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
If the US committed ground troops to Tehran and restored the Shah governing with anti regime groups it would.
Afghanistan was won in 2001 when the Taliban were removed, the mistake was Biden withdrawing US troops which allowed the Taliban back in Kabul not Bush deploying ground troops in the first place
Yet it seems that the world must proceed directly to economic disaster and/or the use of nuclear weapons (no passing Go and no collecting £200) rather than actually see if Hormuz can be sailed through.
It’s raining, as in water, in Dubai today. We’re already telling jokes that there was less disruption last week when it was raining missiles.
As in Ukraine, war gives everyone a sense of humour.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
Worked in August 1941, Tehran was captured within 6 days.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
They still are peerless in many ways, no other country could project 5% of the firepower into the Gulf that the US has in the last four weeks.
There is something else going on with the Hormuz other than the drone threat, but I don't know what it is. The Iraqis, with technical and doctrinal support from the French, struggled to sink tankers with fucking Excocets during the 'Tanker War' of the mid 80s. The USN could and would secure the strait if ordered to, but they have not been ordered to. Maybe Trump is very reluctant to take any significant amount of casualties or lose a ship.
It's also a matter of changed attitudes.
Back in the 80s, the insurers priced in a few holes from anti ship missiles. Tankers are very hard to sink, as you say.
Used to work, long ago, with a tanker captain who ran down an Iranian speedboat that was threatening his ship - put the helm over and slapped them with the side. Quarter million tons at 15 knots...
The thing is, these days, the insurers are a bit more sensitive to the optics of dead sailors and pollution. The last is a big one. So they withdraw coverage at the drop of a hat.
The rust-bucket-manned-by-exependable-african lot would go through tomorrow. Just insure their ship for 110% of the value they claim (always bullshit) and indemnify against pollution risk.
NAE but is not the government gaining a big tax windfall right now on fuel taxes? Why then not cut the tax rate and reduce pump costs as has happened already in Spain for example?
For every 6 penny increase the Gov't gains 1p. So on diesel the gov't is pretty much getting the full tax hike pencilled in already
Yes, that's right.
But for anyone who doesn't know, the Govt only gains VAT. Fuel duty is a fixed number of pence per litre so no gain in Fuel duty.
So if net price up 5p, VAT up 1p (ie 20% of 5p) - so total price up 6p.
However the point is if the public is spending more on petrol they will be spending less on other things, so the VAT take on everything else will go down.
Now some things are zero rated but big picture is Govt may actually gain very little overall.
Given that so many of the basics are zero rated and that fuel is an essential for the majority of people, I think you are wrong that the Govt will gain little overall.
Depends on just how severe the depression is.
I think there is an argument for a reduced tax on fuel but the consensus is it’s one of the “best” taxes to levy - unavoidable, simple, inelastic, and on personal transport highly progressive. The only better alternative is probably income tax.
Doing it in a fuel crisis makes sense short term but in the long term it’s a disaster - this sense that the government will always come to the rescue is why we are so vulnerable to crises, and why our debt is so high. £50 billion in 2022 and wr haven’t learnt the lesson.
It is very regressive on personal transport. Always has been, but today when new vehicles are either hybrids or electric it is more so.
Someone going to a minimum wage job in a 10 year old banger is paying a far higher percentage of their income in fuel duty than someone going to work in their new Tesla.
By decile of income, the poorest pay far, far, far more as a percentage of income on fuel duty. The richest pay far less as a percentage of income. Which is how progressive or regressive taxation is measured.
That’s a function of them having a low income. You can either assess it as a balanced tax, because everyone pays the same rate, or progressive, because the richest households drive far more than the poorest.
In fact the government has actually made taxes on energy more progressive, by the latter measure, by reducing levies on electricity which is what dominates spending for lower income households relative to petrol/diesel and gas.
No you can't. Progressive or regressive taxation is literally defined as tax take proportionate to income, not mileage.
Mileage is an insane measure to use anyway when modern vehicles either consume a fraction of fuel per mile, or none.
The poorest pay a considerably higher proportion of income on fuel duty than the rich do. Therefore it is by definition regressive. Very regressive.
Which is unsurprising as it is a tax on an essential and essentials are typically zero rated for that reason. Fuel should be zero rated.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
If the US committed ground troops to Tehran and restored the Shah governing with anti regime groups it would.
That grifter Pahlavi is a non-starter. He's quite old, fond of the high life and there is no viable succession. His oldest daughter is a just a typical Tehrangeles influencer/model/whatever who has never set foot in Iran.
I’m properly worrying now, as it seems - finally - are equity markets. We have an unusual situation: a war with no obvious exit-route, no obvious way either side can win (or lose), no logic, and at a time global energy supply is already constrained by one of the biggest producers - Russia - having already taken itself beyond the pale 4 years ago.
Why can’t we have a rest from these relentless global crises? Just a decade of calm. In 20 years we’ve had the worst global financial crises since the 20s, a Eurozone sovereign debt crisis, decadal civil wars in Syria and Iraq and an insurgent caliphate triggering a huge refugee crisis, 4 years of Brexit upheaval, the worst global pandemic since Spanish flu, a Russian invasion of the world’s breadbasket and the cutting off of gas to Europe, a long running Houthi threat to shipping in the Red Sea, and now this.
That’s not even mentioning the natural disasters that had economic impacts, like the Japanese tsunami and wide scale droughts and wildfires. And guess what, we’re getting an El Niño this year. Typically inflationary and with a negative impact on global GDP.
It's a good question, to which it is impossible to know the answer.
One possible answer comes from Canadian academic Thomas Homer-Dixon in The Upside of Down. To paraphrase: economic interdependencies as a result of globalisation has made our societies and economies much more brittle, blown off course by events far away.
It's a persuasive argument imv CF the speed at which COVID morphed from a Wuhan epidemic to a global pandemic was as a result of our global interdependence.
The US wasn’t militarily peerless or invincible in the 20th century either. It ground out a score draw in Korea, cocked up an attempted invasion of Cuba, and lost a decade long war in Vietnam.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
Yes, we should really be concentrating on the rsoles that have cut off fuel causing patients on ventilators to die bacause of powercuts. Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
If the US committed ground troops to Tehran and restored the Shah governing with anti regime groups it would.
That grifter Pahlavi is a non-starter. He's quite old, fond of the high life and there is no viable succession. His oldest daughter is a just a typical Tehrangeles influencer/model/whatever who has never set foot in Iran.
He has plenty of support from Iranian exiles displaying his portrait on the streets and the more liberal Tehran population would back him with US troops supporting him, even if the regime retained support in pockets of more hardline Islam in rural areas and smaller towns.
Plenty of people getting a bit over-excited on a Monday morning and let's hope there are enough trousers for all the braces being thrown around.
West Texas Intermediate remains below $100 while Brent is $113 per barrel. Not quite sure why the disparityin prices is so great.
I presume our old friend uncertainty is doing the rounds and everyone is agitated about what Trump might or might not do and how the Iranians might or might not respond.
I see one or two are "hoping" 10year gilts will do for Starmer what they did for Truss - I suspect not given the very different circumstances.
On topic, I don't get the antipathy to Rayner any more than I get the antipathy to Starmer. There seems a visceral disappointment she hadn't built a billion houses before she was forced out of office but, and here I think the maxim isn't wholly appropriate, Rome wasn't built in a day and the Conservatives had 14 years of leading the Government to build all these houses and change the planning system etc, etc.
I'm also not sure what she did was anywhere near a hanging offence given what others have got away with in recent times. Nonetheless, she will serve her penance in the wilderness and return as so many have before her.
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
Yes, we should really be concentrating on the rsoles that have cut off fuel causing patients on ventilators to die bacause of powercuts. Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
No, it’s the Cuban leadership preferring to give scarce fuel to the Western commies than their own hospitals.
The US wasn’t militarily peerless or invincible in the 20th century either. It ground out a score draw in Korea, cocked up an attempted invasion of Cuba, and lost a decade long war in Vietnam.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
That’s somewhat wrong. It was peerless. Even the USSR never quite matched the military power of the USA. Tho nukes made war between them unthinkable. It was also invincible - in the pure sense it could not be conquered.
However it’s fair to say American military adventures did not often go well, even back then
And now, with drones, it’s even harder for large powers to truly defeat smaller powers. As Russia has discovered in Ukraine
There is no way Trump will send troops into mainland Iran. It would be Iraq on meth. He MAY try and seize Kharg island
The US wasn’t militarily peerless or invincible in the 20th century either. It ground out a score draw in Korea, cocked up an attempted invasion of Cuba, and lost a decade long war in Vietnam.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
Had the US kept troops in Vietnam Saigon would never have fallen either, it was the Democrat controlled Congress who cut off funds for it forcing Ford to withdraw US troops.
So blame the Democrats for both the Vietnam defeat and for the Taliban reclaiming Kabul once Biden withdrew troops (though Trump may not have been much better, John McCain was willing to keep US troops in Afghanistan indefinitely and of course famously said he would keep US troops in Iraq for 100 years or more if needed)
The economic consequences of this insanity by Trump are becoming ever more alarming. We face genuine shortages (as well as exorbitant prices) of fuel. Keep your cars topped up. Unless we find a way to stop this madness we are facing a deep recession.
Surely even the Muppet chorus that Trump has appointed to his cabinet can see this? The 22nd amendment is one of the very few options left.
Anyone with a brain knew Trump 2 would be really bad, a classic in sequels (Godfather 2 being the honourable exception) but this is off the scale. For Gods sake America, get a grip.
Yes
Happy Armageddon Day, PB
BRACE
If Trump uses nukes he would assume the Strait reopens. Do you think he'll mark his moment in history?
IF he does it then two consequences accruing therefrom will be...
Russia will use one in the SMO. Maybe a 'test' detonation over the Black Sea. One or more Western governments will fall in the subsequent economic depression. And possibly not peacefully.
That would all work for Russia. Trump and Putin are desperate for liberal democratic governments to be replaced with authoritarian ones. Russia is no longer reliant on the West so wouldn't they be insulated from, excuse the pun, the fallout?
And DJT is remembered forever.
He'll be remembered alright. In the pantheon of 'days of infamy', those seismic events which upend the world and take it to a dark place with terrible consequences, the latest addition, sitting next to 9/11 since both took place in the USA albeit twenty three years apart, will be 5/11. There was a before and there was an after.
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
Yes, we should really be concentrating on the rsoles that have cut off fuel causing patients on ventilators to die bacause of powercuts. Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
No, it’s the Cuban leadership preferring to give scarce fuel to the Western commies than their own hospitals.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
They still are peerless in many ways, no other country could project 5% of the firepower into the Gulf that the US has in the last four weeks.
There is something else going on with the Hormuz other than the drone threat, but I don't know what it is. The Iraqis, with technical and doctrinal support from the French, struggled to sink tankers with fucking Excocets during the 'Tanker War' of the mid 80s. The USN could and would secure the strait if ordered to, but they have not been ordered to. Maybe Trump is very reluctant to take any significant amount of casualties or lose a ship.
For all his many faults, Trump knows what putting people on the ground means, and it’s many transport aircraft arriving back in the US carrying flag-draped coffins. He’s does at least appear pretty determined to avoid that.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
If the US committed ground troops to Tehran and restored the Shah governing with anti regime groups it would.
That grifter Pahlavi is a non-starter. He's quite old, fond of the high life and there is no viable succession. His oldest daughter is a just a typical Tehrangeles influencer/model/whatever who has never set foot in Iran.
He has plenty of support from Iranian exiles displaying his portrait on the streets and the more liberal Tehran population would back him with US troops supporting him, even if the regime retained support in pockets of more hardline Islam in rural areas and smaller towns.
Yebbut what's Cyrano de Pahlavi's polling like in downtown Tehran?
The US wasn’t militarily peerless or invincible in the 20th century either. It ground out a score draw in Korea, cocked up an attempted invasion of Cuba, and lost a decade long war in Vietnam.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
That’s somewhat wrong. It was peerless. Even the USSR never quite matched the military power of the USA. Tho nukes made war between them unthinkable. It was also invincible - in the pure sense it could not be conquered.
However it’s fair to say American military adventures did not often go well, even back then
And now, with drones, it’s even harder for large powers to truly defeat smaller powers. As Russia has discovered in Ukraine
There is no way Trump will send troops into mainland Iran. It would be Iraq on meth. He MAY try and seize Kharg island
Iraq is now Saddam free and elects its own government
“The Australian government acknowledges that six oil tankers from Malaysia, Singapore, and South Korea, expected to arrive next month, have been canceled.
Today, 147 petrol stations ran out of petrol or diesel”
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
Yes, we should really be concentrating on the rsoles that have cut off fuel causing patients on ventilators to die bacause of powercuts. Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
No, it’s the Cuban leadership preferring to give scarce fuel to the Western commies than their own hospitals.
Why is the fuel scarce, skip?
Because it is a poorly-run, impoverished, corrupt, communist nation.
I just hope labour are not that stupid to replace Starmer with Rayner when we are in the middle of an existential crisis
And as for Starmer agreeing to be demoted to Foreign Secretary we are really on fantasy island
I have no faith or trust in Starmer but this is not what the country wants or needs right now
Have you seen the price of petrol? This is on Starmer's watch.
He took a phonecall from the Putin shill at Mar a Lago yesterday. We will have ships in the Gulf by teatime tomorrow. Get rid.
I understand you would prefer the Churchillian Boris Johnson to the fishwife Rayner, but Johnson is a) not inside Parliament or b) the Party of Government. We need a Peter Wright style coup before we get Big Dog back in the driving seat.
What on earth have you had for breakfast ?
I have had years of battles on here with @HYUFD over his devotion to Johnson who I even voted against in the members ballot
Spraying unfounded allegations around and even using 'fishwife' Rayner indicates you are losing it
Either way Starmer needs to go. Do you trust him not to fold for Trump?
In fairness to the "fishwife" she would have no qualms about telling Trump to do one.
My wife comes from fishwife stock in Arbroath and Auchmithy. Strong independent women who worked with their men in a tough trade, who knew their own mind and were not shy in expressing it. Any man would be fortunate to share their life with such a woman. I certainly have been.
I have no doubt your good, lady, wife would have no qualms about telling Trump "to do one" too.. Perhaps one of Starmer's manifold faults is he is no "fishwife". Is this morning's Cobra meeting a confirmation of capitulation?
Fishwife is a derogatory term as you can see from both @DavidL and my wives heritage, and indeed they were amongst the most hard working women in their communities
It’s just his unfunny, affected, self pitying style. He doesn’t really think of her as a fishwife, he’s parodying a caricature of people he disagrees with.
I took a decision in November to neither respond to your posts or comment on posting characteristics of yours I find offensive. My only interaction has been to defend comments you have made directly to me or about me.
You have decided you despise someone you have never met on a random blog. How bizarre.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
If the US committed ground troops to Tehran and restored the Shah governing with anti regime groups it would.
That grifter Pahlavi is a non-starter. He's quite old, fond of the high life and there is no viable succession. His oldest daughter is a just a typical Tehrangeles influencer/model/whatever who has never set foot in Iran.
He has plenty of support from Iranian exiles displaying his portrait on the streets and the more liberal Tehran population would back him with US troops supporting him, even if the regime retained support in pockets of more hardline Islam in rural areas and smaller towns.
Yebbut what's Cyrano de Pahlavi's polling like in downtown Tehran?
Constitutional monarchs are not politicians, he would just be a ceremonial head of state to reunite the nation, the head of government and the new regime would come from anti regime forces elected by the voters
Plenty of people getting a bit over-excited on a Monday morning and let's hope there are enough trousers for all the braces being thrown around.
West Texas Intermediate remains below $100 while Brent is $113 per barrel. Not quite sure why the disparityin prices is so great.
I presume our old friend uncertainty is doing the rounds and everyone is agitated about what Trump might or might not do and how the Iranians might or might not respond.
I see one or two are "hoping" 10year gilts will do for Starmer what they did for Truss - I suspect not given the very different circumstances.
On topic, I don't get the antipathy to Rayner any more than I get the antipathy to Starmer. There seems a visceral disappointment she hadn't built a billion houses before she was forced out of office but, and here I think the maxim isn't wholly appropriate, Rome wasn't built in a day and the Conservatives had 14 years of leading the Government to build all these houses and change the planning system etc, etc.
I'm also not sure what she did was anywhere near a hanging offence given what others have got away with in recent times. Nonetheless, she will serve her penance in the wilderness and return as so many have before her.
On the disparity in pricing of oil - this is because the oil market isn't about perfect substitution and supply worldwide.
So if you have lots of oil in Texas, you can't (easily) get more of it to markets cut off by the Middle East thing. It can only (in the short and medium term) go to the markets it was already serving. So you have market segmentation, until the price differentials make sense to spend the extra on getting to the other places. If you can.
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
Yes, we should really be concentrating on the rsoles that have cut off fuel causing patients on ventilators to die bacause of powercuts. Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
No, it’s the Cuban leadership preferring to give scarce fuel to the Western commies than their own hospitals.
Why is the fuel scarce, skip?
Because it is a poorly-run, impoverished, corrupt, communist nation.
I thought it was because of a US blockade on oil imports.
The US wasn’t militarily peerless or invincible in the 20th century either. It ground out a score draw in Korea, cocked up an attempted invasion of Cuba, and lost a decade long war in Vietnam.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
As I remember there was more British killed in the first 3 days of the 2003 Iraq war than there have been combined US and Israeli military deaths in 23 days this time.
Yet now people seem eager to push the economic effects escalation almost if they are bored with the military situation.
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
Yes, we should really be concentrating on the rsoles that have cut off fuel causing patients on ventilators to die bacause of powercuts. Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
No, it’s the Cuban leadership preferring to give scarce fuel to the Western commies than their own hospitals.
Why is the fuel scarce, skip?
Six decades of communism, and allies such as Venezuela, Iran, and Russia, having more important things on their plates right now. Perhaps China might oblige?
NAE but is not the government gaining a big tax windfall right now on fuel taxes? Why then not cut the tax rate and reduce pump costs as has happened already in Spain for example?
For every 6 penny increase the Gov't gains 1p. So on diesel the gov't is pretty much getting the full tax hike pencilled in already
Yes, that's right.
But for anyone who doesn't know, the Govt only gains VAT. Fuel duty is a fixed number of pence per litre so no gain in Fuel duty.
So if net price up 5p, VAT up 1p (ie 20% of 5p) - so total price up 6p.
However the point is if the public is spending more on petrol they will be spending less on other things, so the VAT take on everything else will go down.
Now some things are zero rated but big picture is Govt may actually gain very little overall.
Given that so many of the basics are zero rated and that fuel is an essential for the majority of people, I think you are wrong that the Govt will gain little overall.
Depends on just how severe the depression is.
I think there is an argument for a reduced tax on fuel but the consensus is it’s one of the “best” taxes to levy - unavoidable, simple, inelastic, and on personal transport highly progressive. The only better alternative is probably income tax.
Doing it in a fuel crisis makes sense short term but in the long term it’s a disaster - this sense that the government will always come to the rescue is why we are so vulnerable to crises, and why our debt is so high. £50 billion in 2022 and wr haven’t learnt the lesson.
It is very regressive on personal transport. Always has been, but today when new vehicles are either hybrids or electric it is more so.
Someone going to a minimum wage job in a 10 year old banger is paying a far higher percentage of their income in fuel duty than someone going to work in their new Tesla.
By decile of income, the poorest pay far, far, far more as a percentage of income on fuel duty. The richest pay far less as a percentage of income. Which is how progressive or regressive taxation is measured.
But it’s the wrong measure. Fuel duty is related to consumption of fuel not the income of the user
Oh absolutely you can debate whether progressive taxation is a good idea or not, but the word has a meaning. It means that the proportion of tax paid goes up as income goes up, versus regressive taxation which is the proportion of tax paid goes up as income goes down.
Fuel duty is exceptionally regressive. It is one of the most regressive taxes we have. VAT, especially since most essentials (besides fuel) are zero-rated tends to scale with income. Fuel duty does not. The poorest pay considerably more proportionately out of their income than the richer deciles do.
There are not many major taxes we have that are as regressive as fuel duty. Yet @Eabhal falsely calls it progressive - that is simply wrong as a matter of fact, setting aside any debate as to whether progressive taxation is a good or bad idea.
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
That is why he imposed his massive tariffs on China as well as everyone else, however that has also raised costs for US consumers. Even Biden imposed tariffs on Chinese imports but he was sensible enough to largely have free trade with most of the rest of the world. Trump could still have removed the Iranian regime with ground troops but so far he has refused because of the body bags
Iran is massive - a ground attack simply wouldn’t work.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
If the US committed ground troops to Tehran and restored the Shah governing with anti regime groups it would.
That grifter Pahlavi is a non-starter. He's quite old, fond of the high life and there is no viable succession. His oldest daughter is a just a typical Tehrangeles influencer/model/whatever who has never set foot in Iran.
He has plenty of support from Iranian exiles displaying his portrait on the streets and the more liberal Tehran population would back him with US troops supporting him, even if the regime retained support in pockets of more hardline Islam in rural areas and smaller towns.
Yebbut what's Cyrano de Pahlavi's polling like in downtown Tehran?
Constitutional monarchs are not politicians, he would just be a ceremonial head of state to reunite the nation, the head of government and the new regime would come from anti regime forces elected by the voters
Can you name a single figure that might feature in this new regime? If you can't I don't think we've even reached the fantasy corrupt middle east regimes in thrall to Trump stage.
Went to the local pub for lunch, the song currently playing is REM’s It’s The End of the World As We Know It (and I Feel Fine)
There is a deep techno track from one of my favourite artists, Lapalux. Very few lyrics, but right in the middle of a dancefloor stomper it all goes quite and a voice says:
When I look at the situation Out there in the big world It just breaks my heart We just seen to be lost
Then the beat kicks back in.
I first heard it about 3 am in a club just after January 6th. Even now a few years later putting it on my headphones at full volume is one of my favourite forms of melancholic escapism.
Jeremy Corbyn and friends’ trip to Cuba is going about as well as expected.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
Yes, we should really be concentrating on the rsoles that have cut off fuel causing patients on ventilators to die bacause of powercuts. Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
No, it’s the Cuban leadership preferring to give scarce fuel to the Western commies than their own hospitals.
Why is the fuel scarce, skip?
Because it is a poorly-run, impoverished, corrupt, communist nation.
I thought it was because of a US blockade on oil imports.
The US has long been blockading Cuba, which has chosen to ally itself with Venezuela, Russia and other communist dictatorships.
Cuba is paying the price for its own leadership's choices, not America's.
The US wasn’t militarily peerless or invincible in the 20th century either. It ground out a score draw in Korea, cocked up an attempted invasion of Cuba, and lost a decade long war in Vietnam.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
That’s somewhat wrong. It was peerless. Even the USSR never quite matched the military power of the USA. Tho nukes made war between them unthinkable. It was also invincible - in the pure sense it could not be conquered.
However it’s fair to say American military adventures did not often go well, even back then
And now, with drones, it’s even harder for large powers to truly defeat smaller powers. As Russia has discovered in Ukraine
There is no way Trump will send troops into mainland Iran. It would be Iraq on meth. He MAY try and seize Kharg island
Iraq is now Saddam free and elects its own government
Well maybe. But it’s still a major mess, and badly divided. And jihadism has not disappeared
To get Iraq to this state America spent about eleventy trillion dollars, and tens of thousands died, and the world was thrown into turmoil
Was it worth it? I don’t think so. It was a calamitous error
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
They still are peerless in many ways, no other country could project 5% of the firepower into the Gulf that the US has in the last four weeks.
There is something else going on with the Hormuz other than the drone threat, but I don't know what it is. The Iraqis, with technical and doctrinal support from the French, struggled to sink tankers with fucking Excocets during the 'Tanker War' of the mid 80s. The USN could and would secure the strait if ordered to, but they have not been ordered to. Maybe Trump is very reluctant to take any significant amount of casualties or lose a ship.
There is a very big difference between now and the 1980s in that the critical cargoes to the world economy are the bulk LNG carriers. You wouldn't necessarily have to sink one of those; aren't they potentially massive floating bombs, something an oil tanker just isn't ?
The US wasn’t militarily peerless or invincible in the 20th century either. It ground out a score draw in Korea, cocked up an attempted invasion of Cuba, and lost a decade long war in Vietnam.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
That’s somewhat wrong. It was peerless. Even the USSR never quite matched the military power of the USA. Tho nukes made war between them unthinkable. It was also invincible - in the pure sense it could not be conquered.
However it’s fair to say American military adventures did not often go well, even back then
And now, with drones, it’s even harder for large powers to truly defeat smaller powers. As Russia has discovered in Ukraine
There is no way Trump will send troops into mainland Iran. It would be Iraq on meth. He MAY try and seize Kharg island
Iraq is now Saddam free and elects its own government
Well maybe. But it’s still a major mess, and badly divided. And jihadism has not disappeared
To get Iraq to this state America spent about eleventy trillion dollars, and tens of thousands died, and the world was thrown into turmoil
Was it worth it? I don’t think so. It was a calamitous error
If Iran were in the state Iraq is now, the Middle East and the world would be a far more peaceful place.
Paris has elected a new socialist Mayor, Emmanuel Gregoire, joining London and New York city again electing a left wing Mayor. Former PM under Macron Edouard Philippe is also re elected Mayor of Le Havre and likely to be the candidate of the Macron centre and centre right block against the National Rally and Le Pen or Bardella and Melenchon and the socialists in the presidential election next year https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crk14m7mjddo
One of Trump’s many problems is that he mentally exists in the late 20th century, when the USA was hegemonic and militarily peerless - able to crush enemies at will
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
They still are peerless in many ways, no other country could project 5% of the firepower into the Gulf that the US has in the last four weeks.
There is something else going on with the Hormuz other than the drone threat, but I don't know what it is. The Iraqis, with technical and doctrinal support from the French, struggled to sink tankers with fucking Excocets during the 'Tanker War' of the mid 80s. The USN could and would secure the strait if ordered to, but they have not been ordered to. Maybe Trump is very reluctant to take any significant amount of casualties or lose a ship.
There is a very big difference between now and the 1980s in that the critical cargoes to the world economy are the bulk LNG carriers. You wouldn't necessarily have to sink one of those; aren't they potentially massive floating bombs, something an oil tanker just isn't ?
"Necessary? Necessary? Is it necessary that I drink my own urine? No, but it's sterile, and I like the taste!"
Comments
10 year bond rate is at 5.06% this morning
An 18 year high
Happy Armageddon Day, PB
BRACE
The comparison with Edward VIII also doesn't hold, he was sovereign unlike Andrew and Edward remained Duke of Windsor to the end of his life whereas Andrew has been stripped of his Duke of York title, even if both were promiscious
Trump has done nothing but try and fxck the global economy with his tariffs and now this madness .
Zanzibar?
Something that many people don't know - most of the "ambulances" in the UK are not zooming around with blue lights, getting the critically ill to hospital in under x minutes.
The vast majority are mini-buses (with adaptions for the less able, often) moving the sick and elderly at a more sedate pace. It's a vital job, but far less sexy.
I don’t think he goes after May elections.
Hopefully we have a blazing summer ahead of us because there are few other things to look forward to.
Politically? Starmer is safe. A technocrat is what you need when chaos surrounds you. Also, this is good news for the Tories and bad news for both Reform and the Greens. Upending the system in a populist revolution is something you do when times are good, not when your focus is on immediate things like paying your bills.
But what about slightly rude strikes?
That annoying-in-the-edging-to-psoition-to-get-on-the-train-before-people-in-the-queue-kind-of-way-strikes?
"Are you looking at me?" strikes?
https://morayspeyside.com/inspiration/year-of-stories-2022/apparition-of-stotfield/
Like Jews, Muslims are very quick in burying the dead.
Russia will use one in the SMO. Maybe a 'test' detonation over the Black Sea.
One or more Western governments will fall in the subsequent economic depression. And possibly not peacefully.
Now it is economically rivalled and industrially outranked by China. It is also heavily indebted. And militarily the balance has shifted in favour of smaller cheaper drones. So it is harder to impose overwhelming power even on inferior, poorer rivals
Which means he may lash out in frustration as this drags on, unexpectedly
Why can’t we have a rest from these relentless global crises? Just a decade of calm. In 20 years we’ve had the worst global financial crises since the 20s, a Eurozone sovereign debt crisis, decadal civil wars in Syria and Iraq and an insurgent caliphate triggering a huge refugee crisis, 4 years of Brexit upheaval, the worst global pandemic since Spanish flu, a Russian invasion of the world’s breadbasket and the cutting off of gas to Europe, a long running Houthi threat to shipping in the Red Sea, and now this.
That’s not even mentioning the natural disasters that had economic impacts, like the Japanese tsunami and wide scale droughts and wildfires. And guess what, we’re getting an El Niño this year. Typically inflationary and with a negative impact on global GDP.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/mar/23/anyone-but-labour-or-anyone-but-reform-clash-of-animosities-likely-to-define-may-local-elections
Kemi Badenoch: -25
Nigel Farage: -39
Keir Starmer: -48
Ed Davey: -14 (38% DK)
Zack Polanski: -14 (42% DK)
https://x.com/yougov/status/2036011246743417336
Farage rapidly heading for Keir Starmer levels. Starmer seems no uptick with YouGov.
Polanski falls 6 points with YouGov.
Overall things are looking good for Tories.
I will refer you to my comment about Afghanistan from last week, started 1979 continued to 2020 and no one won
This is a disaster for our country
And DJT is remembered forever.
There is something else going on with the Hormuz other than the drone threat, but I don't know what it is. The Iraqis, with technical and doctrinal support from the French, struggled to sink tankers with fucking Excocets during the 'Tanker War' of the mid 80s. The USN could and would secure the strait if ordered to, but they have not been ordered to. Maybe Trump is very reluctant to take any significant amount of casualties or lose a ship.
They’re staying in the only hotel in Havana that appears to have power, as even hospitals have run out of fuel for their generators, then there’s what can only be described as a poverty safari, the Western communists going around in tour buses looking at the local poors as if they were animals in a safari park.
https://x.com/samanthataghoy/status/2035887568294686816
https://nypost.com/2026/03/22/world-news/champagne-socialists-in-cuba-stage-concert-stay-in-5-star-hotel-as-country-plunges-into-nationwide-blackout/
Nationally? We all hang together or we all hang separately.
Same with alliances. Every time I read / hear someone foam on about the EU and betraying Brexit I just laugh.
Polanski is down 6 points. The more people see the less they like.
It's happening.
Tory voters more divided, 46% would mainly vote against Labour candidates but 24% would vote against Reform candidates
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/mar/23/anyone-but-labour-or-anyone-but-reform-clash-of-animosities-likely-to-define-may-local-elections
Unless you are in the BreakTheSystem mood. See Brexit.
A lot of people on the left and right are in that place. There was a rather good piece in the Guardian about Lincolnshire. The whole place is heading Reform. One of the putative reasons is planning - houses, solar farms. The locals haven’t been politically engaged on either - true lots of NIMBYIsm. But the push back against NIMBYism in a democracy has to be a sales pitch. Simple fiat imposition from the centre provokes what is happening.
The locals see the usual giant house builders building crap they can’t afford, without extra services. So they get years of disruption and an effective reduction in hospitals, schools etc. To add to the fun, the religious belief in the Evil of Roads, means congestion. And the active reduction in car parking makes that worse as well.
On the solar farms, it seems that a number of projects are fencing off the fields. Even having rights of way closed.
I am In favour of both house building and solar farms. But we must do better in a democracy that simply announce “you are over ruled”
The answer to everything taking a decade to plan, is not to remove all rules (and Process). It is to devise a process that is quicker and meets the real issues that development brings locally.
For Ed and Zak, I think they'd only have a chance of breaking in to that with both net positive ratings and higher gross positives than the big three.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5111432#Comment_5111432
Sadly on the money. Mad scary times.
https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-update-evening-special-report-march-22-2026/
Yet it seems that the world must proceed directly to economic disaster and/or the use of nuclear weapons (no passing Go and no collecting £200) rather than actually see if Hormuz can be sailed through.
Afghanistan was won in 2001 when the Taliban were removed, the mistake was Biden withdrawing US troops which allowed the Taliban back in Kabul not Bush deploying ground troops in the first place
As in Ukraine, war gives everyone a sense of humour.
Back in the 80s, the insurers priced in a few holes from anti ship missiles. Tankers are very hard to sink, as you say.
Used to work, long ago, with a tanker captain who ran down an Iranian speedboat that was threatening his ship - put the helm over and slapped them with the side. Quarter million tons at 15 knots...
The thing is, these days, the insurers are a bit more sensitive to the optics of dead sailors and pollution. The last is a big one. So they withdraw coverage at the drop of a hat.
The rust-bucket-manned-by-exependable-african lot would go through tomorrow. Just insure their ship for 110% of the value they claim (always bullshit) and indemnify against pollution risk.
Mileage is an insane measure to use anyway when modern vehicles either consume a fraction of fuel per mile, or none.
The poorest pay a considerably higher proportion of income on fuel duty than the rich do. Therefore it is by definition regressive. Very regressive.
Which is unsurprising as it is a tax on an essential and essentials are typically zero rated for that reason. Fuel should be zero rated.
One possible answer comes from Canadian academic Thomas Homer-Dixon in The Upside of Down. To paraphrase: economic interdependencies as a result of globalisation has made our societies and economies much more brittle, blown off course by events far away.
It's a persuasive argument imv CF the speed at which COVID morphed from a Wuhan epidemic to a global pandemic was as a result of our global interdependence.
Wars against a determined enemy are difficult. The two gulf wars were won easily because the enemy military effectively disbanded itself. I’d say that was the exception, not the rule.
Bound to be woke Dems at the bottom of it.
Plenty of people getting a bit over-excited on a Monday morning and let's hope there are enough trousers for all the braces being thrown around.
West Texas Intermediate remains below $100 while Brent is $113 per barrel. Not quite sure why the disparityin prices is so great.
I presume our old friend uncertainty is doing the rounds and everyone is agitated about what Trump might or might not do and how the Iranians might or might not respond.
I see one or two are "hoping" 10year gilts will do for Starmer what they did for Truss - I suspect not given the very different circumstances.
On topic, I don't get the antipathy to Rayner any more than I get the antipathy to Starmer. There seems a visceral disappointment she hadn't built a billion houses before she was forced out of office but, and here I think the maxim isn't wholly appropriate, Rome wasn't built in a day and the Conservatives had 14 years of leading the Government to build all these houses and change the planning system etc, etc.
I'm also not sure what she did was anywhere near a hanging offence given what others have got away with in recent times. Nonetheless, she will serve her penance in the wilderness and return as so many have before her.
However it’s fair to say American military adventures did not often go well, even back then
And now, with drones, it’s even harder for large powers to truly defeat smaller powers. As Russia has discovered in Ukraine
There is no way Trump will send troops into mainland Iran. It would be Iraq on meth. He MAY try and seize Kharg island
So blame the Democrats for both the Vietnam defeat and for the Taliban reclaiming Kabul once Biden withdrew troops (though Trump may not have been much better, John McCain was willing to keep US troops in Afghanistan indefinitely and of course famously said he would keep US troops in Iraq for 100 years or more if needed)
So what he does next is anyone's guess.
“The Australian government acknowledges that six oil tankers from Malaysia, Singapore, and South Korea, expected to arrive next month, have been canceled.
Today, 147 petrol stations ran out of petrol or diesel”
https://x.com/sprinterpress/status/2035720933881602385?s=46
Jeezo. This really is happening, isn’t it? How long before the great British driving public starts to panic and we see long queues at petrol stations?
You have decided you despise someone you have never met on a random blog. How bizarre.
So if you have lots of oil in Texas, you can't (easily) get more of it to markets cut off by the Middle East thing. It can only (in the short and medium term) go to the markets it was already serving. So you have market segmentation, until the price differentials make sense to spend the extra on getting to the other places. If you can.
Yet now people seem eager to push the economic effects escalation almost if they are bored with the military situation.
Fuel duty is exceptionally regressive. It is one of the most regressive taxes we have. VAT, especially since most essentials (besides fuel) are zero-rated tends to scale with income. Fuel duty does not. The poorest pay considerably more proportionately out of their income than the richer deciles do.
There are not many major taxes we have that are as regressive as fuel duty. Yet @Eabhal falsely calls it progressive - that is simply wrong as a matter of fact, setting aside any debate as to whether progressive taxation is a good or bad idea.
If you can't I don't think we've even reached the fantasy corrupt middle east regimes in thrall to Trump stage.
When I look at the situation
Out there in the big world
It just breaks my heart
We just seen to be lost
Then the beat kicks back in.
I first heard it about 3 am in a club just after January 6th. Even now a few years later putting it on my headphones at full volume is one of my favourite forms of melancholic escapism.
Cuba is paying the price for its own leadership's choices, not America's.
To get Iraq to this state America spent about eleventy trillion dollars, and tens of thousands died, and the world was thrown into turmoil
Was it worth it? I don’t think so. It was a calamitous error
You wouldn't necessarily have to sink one of those; aren't they potentially massive floating bombs, something an oil tanker just isn't ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crk14m7mjddo