Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
Mr. Herdson, since 2005 it's become less liberal. Which politician defended free speech over the Danish or Jesus and Mo cartoons?
You paint it as a good thing that a backlash is necessary against politically correct fools who hold cultural sensitivity so sacred they let almost one and a half thousand children be sexually abused rather than call out the criminals.
It's not. In the same way the backlash against migration is because it's been too high for too long, the backlash, by some, against the rancid political correctness (now infecting even medical guidelines*) is because things are so badly wrong.
*If women get the message they can drink the same amount as men, implicit in the new guidelines, it'll at best have no affect and, more likely, lead to higher alcohol poisoning amongst women. Still, women ruining their livers and dying is a small price to pay for 'equality', according to a few over-promoted clowns.
It all depends on what you mean by liberal.
What I meant was that social attitudes associated with the "Looney Left" in the eighties are now mainstream.
There are obvious things to this in how the Tory party party explicitly tries to have ethnic and gender diversity, with an openly lesbian leader in Scotland; that gay marriages are no longer remarkeable and that Paralympic sport has equal status with Olympics in many ways.
Sure, there is a flipside to this (though there are more than a few things that I would take issue with in your list) but that is a seperate issue. The point is that these things are now mainstream, to the point that we have a Tory PM who sees a place for sharia law in the UK. That would have been considered "Looney Leftism" in the Eighties.
Though, paradoxically, there's nothing left wing about sharia law.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
Agreed - my lefty pals get really angry when I say they're not liberal.
It usually follows them telling me I can't say something - like Merkel opening the border was a poor policy decision because it will encourage more migration, ending in needless deaths in transit.
For many, especially of my generation, attacking the right and centre on issues like accepting migration, transgender rights and supranational bodies are seen as natural and inherent proxies of liberalism, despite the policy proposals and implementation themselves being entirely the opposite.
Mr. Stodge, what does "... and prudent financial management aimed at reducing public debt and deficit rather than tax cuts." mean? Higher taxes? Lower spending?
Yes, probably both if I'm honest. If you want to clear down the deficit and start cutting into the debt, you can either a) grow your way out b) hyper inflate your way out or c) seek to remedy both sides of the balance sheet. That means higher taxes and lower spending until we get the finances back into order which for me means running a small surplus and gradually reducing our debt.
The problem is Conservatives won't raise taxes and Labour won't cut spending so the problem never gets resolved.
Osborne significantly increased the tax burden on the better paid but counter balanced this by cuts in taxes for the lesser paid. Overall, however, the tax burden increased as it had to. I still think his policy of increased taxes on the better paid, a real terms freeze on government spending (or as near as politically possible) and policies such as the living wage reducing government support for the low paid were the best we could realistically hope for.
Arguably what was missing was the taxation of the very substantial capital gains of the wealthy on the back of policies like QE which increased asset values. The risks of driving very mobile capital out of the UK are not negligible but failure to tax these gains adequately results in growing inequality and insufficient revenues to reduce the deficit sharply enough.
Whether or not Jeremy Corbyn can find a seat on a train will seem the most trivial nonsense once we let Curly, Mo and Larry loose on totiations. It is to be hoped there will be a serious team of capable officials behind him to do the actual work and clear up the mess and smooth the ruffled feathers.
At the same time, the Prime Minister, whose sole achievements so far have been to go for a walk with her husband and say "Brexit means Brexit" will begin to realise that managing everyone's hopes and expectations for what Brexit actually means won't be that easy whether it's the City with financial passporting or those people who want to see the Channel Tunnel bricked up to stop further economic migration.
Near everyone said the train business was trivial. It was noteworthy for being amusing, for showing Jeremy spins the truth and is not a plain speaker, and also that currently they are suffering from lack of capable officials, and leaders.
You are quite right that may has an impossible job to please everyone in front of her, that does offer some hope even to a distracted labour, since if Brexit goes crap enough their divisions will reemerge. It's not unreasonable it is less talked of will dare.
I don't think thelair.
If it is clear that in fact Corbyn is a spinner and teller of falsehoods in order to make a political point then he is no different from the rest and his usp is shot to pieces.
And this can strengthen Corbyn by showing that when he does listen to the spinners, it all goes wrong, so he must discard Blairite advice and return to the one true path.
Another member of justin's small straws society?
It is probably true his supporters will interpret it his way. Rather than show he spins and always has, it'll be his advisers and now the mean old media are after him. Going after the Kings advisers is a very traditional tactic for defenders of an incompetent King and opponents not ready to take on the King. Until they finally challenged Jeremy plenty of his blunders were blamed on his advisers.
Fundamental misunderstanding of medieval history there I'm afraid - one attacked the King's advisors because it was a proxy for the otherwise treasonous activity of questioning the King's decisions.
It's not a misunderstanding at all, since that was the point I was trying to make. That opponents didn't feel able to attack the King, for good reason in medieval times, so they attacked advisers. And defenders in modern times can similarly deflect onto said adviser, just as pre civil war opponents attack said advisers.
It seems Gus O Donnell is in a continuing state of denial about Brexit.
It means Brexit.
Get over ii.
And incidentally, didn't ex Cab Secs and ex PMs used to keep quiet about policy? Major was a weak leader of the Tory party (because he was too pro-FO and pro-EU) but a gentleman who retired and watched a lot of cricket.
Judging by his pretty ineffective interventions in the EU ref, he ought to have stayed out of politics altogether.
He only said it might not happen. His position seems different to others as the quotes seem less about it was a mistake and more just that it will be bloody hard work and people will setts for less to avoid the hard work. I think he's miscalculated on that, since we won't be left to avoid the hard yards.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
It's the old process by which Out-Groups preach tolerance, but if they become In-Groups they demand that their views become orthodoxy.
Near everyone said the train business was trivial. It was noteworthy for being amusing, for showing Jeremy spins the truth and is not a plain speaker, and also that currently they are suffering from lack of capable officials, and leaders.
You are quite right that may has an impossible job to please everyone in front of her, that does offer some hope even to a distracted labour, since if Brexit goes crap enough their divisions will reemerge. It's not unreasonable it is less talked of will dare.
I don't think thelair.
If it is clear that in fact Corbyn is a spinner and teller of falsehoods in order to make a political point then he is no different from the rest and his usp is shot to pieces.
And this can strengthen Corbyn by showing that when he does listen to the spinners, it all goes wrong, so he must discard Blairite advice and return to the one true path.
Another member of justin's small straws society?
It is probably true his supporters will interpret it his way. Rather than show he spins and always has, it'll be his advisers and now the mean old media are after him. Going after the Kings advisers is a very traditional tactic for defenders of an incompetent King and opponents not ready to take on the King. Until they finally challenged Jeremy plenty of his blunders were blamed on his advisers.
Fundamental misunderstanding of medieval history there I'm afraid - one attacked the King's advisors because it was a proxy for the otherwise treasonous activity of questioning the King's decisions.
It's not a misunderstanding at all, since that was the point I was trying to make. That opponents didn't feel able to attack the King, for good reason in medieval times, so they attacked advisers. And defenders in modern times can similarly deflect onto said adviser, just as pre civil war opponents attack said advisers.
Nope - you're not getting it. Attacks on advisors were attacks on the king. It was neither defence of incompetence nor a halfway house.
You attacked the King's advisors, you'd better have won because otherwise you'll be stripped - of patronage and influence, at least, but almost certainly also of future justice, and likely your entire estates at some point.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
Agreed - my lefty pals get really angry when I say they're not liberal.
It usually follows them telling me I can't say something - like Merkel opening the border was a poor policy decision because it will encourage more migration, ending in needless deaths in transit.
For many, especially of my generation, attacking the right and centre on issues like accepting migration, transgender rights and supranational bodies are seen as natural and inherent proxies of liberalism, despite the policy proposals and implementation themselves being entirely the opposite.
Liberalism means good to such people, that's all. Sometimes the accepted good thing is liberal, but not always. It's also why some people think modern day Tory PMs are really right wing even when they are not.
Though I get confused myself - political compass tells me I should vote for plaid cymru
It seems Gus O Donnell is in a continuing state of denial about Brexit.
It means Brexit.
Get over ii.
And incidentally, didn't ex Cab Secs and ex PMs used to keep quiet about policy? Major was a weak leader of the Tory party (because he was too pro-FO and pro-EU) but a gentleman who retired and watched a lot of cricket.
Judging by his pretty ineffective interventions in the EU ref, he ought to have stayed out of politics altogether.
He only said it might not happen. His position seems different to others as the quotes seem less about it was a mistake and more just that it will be bloody hard work and people will setts for less to avoid the hard work. I think he's miscalculated on that, since we won't be left to avoid the hard yards.
Good morning all.
I can't get excited by O'Donnell, or the outrage from parliamentarians about May's plan for A50 invocation.
If Remain had won, I wouldn't have shut up, nor would anyone else on the 'losing' side. Hardly seems fair to insist that everyone should just stfu and soldier. This is not the Foreign Legion.
The EU might become an attractive option for UK in the future. By that, I mean that the older euro-skeptics die off and our replacements decide that, on balance, they'd prefer to rejoin.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
Agreed - my lefty pals get really angry when I say they're not liberal.
It usually follows them telling me I can't say something - like Merkel opening the border was a poor policy decision because it will encourage more migration, ending in needless deaths in transit.
For many, especially of my generation, attacking the right and centre on issues like accepting migration, transgender rights and supranational bodies are seen as natural and inherent proxies of liberalism, despite the policy proposals and implementation themselves being entirely the opposite.
Liberalism means good to such people, that's all. Sometimes the accepted good thing is liberal, but not always. It's also why some people think modern day Tory PMs are really right wing even when they are not.
Though I get confused myself - political compass tells me I should vote for plaid cymru
Agreed.
Re: PC - Wow - I've literally no idea what policies would trigger that result...
As I've pointed out before the lower divisions read like a list of marginal constituencies.
I think this is revealing about the misconceptions of Conservative supporters:
' One final point: when one of did this exercise before it was striking how many of the comments people made in response were about how they could not believe place X voted a certain way. This was almost always people not believing that place X had voted Conservative. (The standout example was Wolves – then in a constituency held by the Conservatives, something many people struggled to believe, although the seat has now changed hands back to Labour). Occasionally, maybe, this was just a confusion over the difference between where the ground was and the nature of a team’s fans – but it was also a belief that places like that couldn’t or somehow shouldn’t vote Conservative.
This may say something about the individual making those comments – or it may be about the image of the Conservative Party. Conservative voters don’t all wear bowler hats and live in mansions in Surrey or Chelsea, you know. The party wouldn’t have won quite so many elections if they did. '
Arguably what was missing was the taxation of the very substantial capital gains of the wealthy on the back of policies like QE which increased asset values. The risks of driving very mobile capital out of the UK are not negligible but failure to tax these gains adequately results in growing inequality and insufficient revenues to reduce the deficit sharply enough.
Also missing was any willingness to attack obviously wasteful spending such as foreign aid. Reducing that to average G8 or OECD levels alone could have saved billions each year. I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't work in the aid industry who wants Britain to be an "aid superpower", or whatever Cameron's fatuous formulation was.
It seems Gus O Donnell is in a continuing state of denial about Brexit.
It means Brexit.
Get over ii.
And incidentally, didn't ex Cab Secs and ex PMs used to keep quiet about policy? Major was a weak leader of the Tory party (because he was too pro-FO and pro-EU) but a gentleman who retired and watched a lot of cricket.
Judging by his pretty ineffective interventions in the EU ref, he ought to have stayed out of politics altogether.
He only said it might not happen. His position seems different to others as the quotes seem less about it was a mistake and more just that it will be bloody hard work and people will setts for less to avoid the hard work. I think he's miscalculated on that, since we won't be left to avoid the hard yards.
Good morning all.
I can't get excited by O'Donnell, or the outrage from parliamentarians about May's plan for A50 invocation.
If Remain had won, I wouldn't have shut up, nor would anyone else on the 'losing' side. Hardly seems fair to insist that everyone should just stfu and soldier. This is not the Foreign Legion.
The EU might become an attractive option for UK in the future. By that, I mean that the older euro-skeptics die off and our replacements decide that, on balance, they'd prefer to rejoin.
Each generation is sovereign and can make its own decisions but it seems incredibly unlikely to me that the UK would seek to join the EU again once it has left. It is an organisation that has developed in ways not to our advantage and it would have to change out of all recognition for that balance to alter.
Where GOD is clearly right is point out that we were far more deeply integrated into this behemoth than its supporters wanted to admit and unwinding that integration is going to be very difficult, complicated and time consuming. I think it is inevitable that our relationship with the EU will continue to evolve and change for years and years after we have officially left.
' The club in the most leave-leaning constituency of all is Port Vale. The club in the most remain-leaning constituency is Bristol Rovers. The former is in Stoke-on-Trent North (predicted leave vote: 72 per cent), the latter is in Bristol West (21 per cent). Both are Labour-held seats. That kind of sums up the referendum – and Labour’s problem. '
And this to the spinners, it all goes wrong, so he must discard Blairite advice and return to the one true path.
Another member of justin's small straws society?
It is probably true tactic for defenders of an incompetent King and opponents not ready to take on thehis advisers.
Fundamental misunderstanding of medieval history there I'm afraid - one attacked the King's advisors because it was a proxy for the otherwise treasonous activity of questioning the King's decisions.
It's not a misunderstanding at all, since that was the point I was trying to make. That opponents didn't feel able to attack the King, for good reason in medieval times, so they attacked advisers. And defenders in modern times can similarly deflect onto said adviser, just as pre civil war opponents attack said advisers.
Nope - you're not getting it. Attacks on advisors were attacks on the king. It was neither defence of incompetence nor a halfway house.
You attacked the King's advisors, you'd better have won because otherwise you'll be stripped - of patronage and influence, at least, but almost certainly also of future justice, and likely your entire estates at some point.
I do get it, but you dont accept that because you're making a distinction without a difference from what I said or think I meant rather (you said attacking the advisers was a proxy for attacking the King and I agreed for christs sake, they attacked him through advisers as they coukd not him directly, then I extrapolated it to the modern realm which is slightly different) so I will point out I was using a metaphor about modern politics not medieval politics, my reference to kings was not literal.
The point was people attack the people around a leader as a prelude to an attack on said leader, as a proxy attack on that leader or because they cannot yet attack said leader, and leaders will shift blame onto the people around them to fend off attacks in their person, proxy or otherwise. Parliament attainded an adviser of Charles I, it was absolutely an attack on him, but, reluctantly, he still implicitly pretended it was about the adviser and not him by accepting the charge. Both sides play the game.
Note to self - don't use historical metaphors about modern politics less literalist pedants go crazy
Thank you, David, for a really useful article. I can't thank OGH and all involved in running PB enough for the quality of thread headers, and indeed, the debate we get regularly on here.
Without wishing to label anyone as 'nasty' or even 'nastier-than-the-other', it seems clear as day to me that people who engage in such spiteful, angry behaviour simply cannot produce any semblance of a 'kinder, gentler politics'.
If this is 'kinder, gentler', give me the old-fashioned less kind, less gentle - it did at least seem to have a few boundaries set on behaviour. This sort of behaviour doesn't even rise to 'seem to'.
It seems Gus O Donnell is in a continuing state of denial about Brexit.
It means Brexit.
Get over ii.
And incidentally, didn't ex Cab Secs and ex PMs used to keep quiet about policy? Major was a weak leader of the Tory party (because he was too pro-FO and pro-EU) but a gentleman who retired and watched a lot of cricket.
Judging by his pretty ineffective interventions in the EU ref, he ought to have stayed out of politics altogether.
He only said it might not happen. His position seems different to others as the quotes seem less about it was a mistake and more just that it will be bloody hard work and people will setts for less to avoid the hard work. I think he's miscalculated on that, since we won't be left to avoid the hard yards.
Good morning all.
I can't get excited by O'Donnell, or the outrage from parliamentarians about May's plan for A50 invocation.
If Remain had won, I wouldn't have shut up, nor would anyone else on the 'losing' side. Hardly seems fair to insist that everyone should just stfu and soldier. This is not the Foreign Legion.
The EU might become an attractive option for UK in the future. By that, I mean that the older euro-skeptics die off and our replacements decide that, on balance, they'd prefer to rejoin.
Each generation is sovereign and can make its own decisions but it seems incredibly unlikely to me that the UK would seek to join the EU again once it has left. It is an organisation that has developed in ways not to our advantage and it would have to change out of all recognition for that balance to alter.
Where GOD is clearly right is point out that we were far more deeply integrated into this behemoth than its supporters wanted to admit and unwinding that integration is going to be very difficult, complicated and time consuming. I think it is inevitable that our relationship with the EU will continue to evolve and change for years and years after we have officially left.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
Agreed - my lefty pals get really angry when I say they're not liberal.
It usually follows them telling me I can't say something - like Merkel opening the border was a poor policy decision because it will encourage more migration, ending in needless deaths in transit.
For many, especially of my generation, attacking the right and centre on issues like accepting migration, transgender rights and supranational bodies are seen as natural and inherent proxies of liberalism, despite the policy proposals and implementation themselves being entirely the opposite.
Liberalism means good to such people, that's all. Sometimes the accepted good thing is liberal, but not always. It's also why some people think modern day Tory PMs are really right wing even when they are not.
Though I get confused myself - political compass tells me I should vote for plaid cymru
Agreed.
Re: PC - Wow - I've literally no idea what policies would trigger that result...
Me either, bizarrely. I'm a mile away from the LDs, who I generally vote for in an eh kind of way.
Arguably what was missing was the taxation of the very substantial capital gains of the wealthy on the back of policies like QE which increased asset values. The risks of driving very mobile capital out of the UK are not negligible but failure to tax these gains adequately results in growing inequality and insufficient revenues to reduce the deficit sharply enough.
Also missing was any willingness to attack obviously wasteful spending such as foreign aid. Reducing that to average G8 or OECD levels alone could have saved billions each year. I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't work in the aid industry who wants Britain to be an "aid superpower", or whatever Cameron's fatuous formulation was.
I don't agree with that but I do think that there was and remains a need to evolve our aid spending.
Traditional "feed the poor" and inoculate the sick aid has its place but what is not acceptable (to me) is using UK taxpayers money to provide state spending in countries who choose to spend their money on more exciting things like space programs or mistresses for the elite.
OTOH spending money to keep refugees from Syria in the middle east seems a very good idea and that sort of policy should be our focus going forward.
It seems Gus O Donnell is in a continuing state of denial about Brexit.
It means Brexit.
Get over ii.
And incidentally, didn't ex Cab Secs and ex PMs used to keep quiet about policy? Major was a weak leader of the Tory party (because he was too pro-FO and pro-EU) but a gentleman who retired and watched a lot of cricket.
Judging by his pretty ineffective interventions in the EU ref, he ought to have stayed out of politics altogether.
He only said it might not happen. His position seems different to others as the quotes seem less about it was a mistake and more just that it will be bloody hard work and people will setts for less to avoid the hard work. I think he's miscalculated on that, since we won't be left to avoid the hard yards.
Good morning all.
I can't get excited by O'Donnell, or the outrage from parliamentarians about May's plan for A50 invocation.
If Remain had won, I wouldn't have shut up, nor would anyone else on the 'losing' side. Hardly seems fair to insist that everyone should just stfu and soldier. This is not the Foreign Legion.
The EU might become an attractive option for UK in the future. By that, I mean that the older euro-skeptics die off and our replacements decide that, on balance, they'd prefer to rejoin.
Each generation is sovereign and can make its own decisions but it seems incredibly unlikely to me that the UK would seek to join the EU again once it has left. It is an organisation that has developed in ways not to our advantage and it would have to change out of all recognition for that balance to alter.
Where GOD is clearly right is point out that we were far more deeply integrated into this behemoth than its supporters wanted to admit and unwinding that integration is going to be very difficult, complicated and time consuming. I think it is inevitable that our relationship with the EU will continue to evolve and change for years and years after we have officially left.
I think we're in broad agreement. Stiglitz points out the obvious; the EZ has to either go for 'More Europe' or 'Less Europe'. If they choose the latter, it might be in our national interest to rejoin. Then again, it might not - however, we should never rule things out.
Completely agree on your second paragraph. There are a lot of over-optimistic Brexiteers who don't seem to appreciate that Europe will always loom large in British affairs.
Thank you, David, for a really useful article. I can't thank OGH and all involved in running PB enough for the quality of thread headers, and indeed, the debate we get regularly on here.
Without wishing to label anyone as 'nasty' or even 'nastier-than-the-other', it seems clear as day to me that people who engage in such spiteful, angry behaviour simply cannot produce any semblance of a 'kinder, gentler politics'.
If this is 'kinder, gentler', give me the old-fashioned less kind, less gentle - it did at least seem to have a few boundaries set on behaviour. This sort of behaviour doesn't even rise to 'seem to'.
And good morning, everyone.
I think you're right about the angry not being able to be kinder in politics. But don't let them hear you say that.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
It's the old process by which Out-Groups preach tolerance, but if they become In-Groups they demand that their views become orthodoxy.
You also get people who preach intolerance of one view and then change to preaching intolerance of the opposite view as orthodoxies change.
' The club in the most leave-leaning constituency of all is Port Vale. The club in the most remain-leaning constituency is Bristol Rovers. The former is in Stoke-on-Trent North (predicted leave vote: 72 per cent), the latter is in Bristol West (21 per cent). Both are Labour-held seats. That kind of sums up the referendum – and Labour’s problem. '
That's one of the most interesting features of the result - the big divide between different types of Labour-voting area. Inner London, Brighton, Norwich, Bristol, university cities all hugely favoured Remain. But, non-London Metropolitan Borough Councils voted Leave by 55/45%, including every authority in the West Midlands and South Yorkshire.
It seems Gus O Donnell is in a continuing state of denial about Brexit.
Good morning all.
I can't get excited by O'Donnell, or the outrage from parliamentarians about May's plan for A50 invocation.
If Remain had won, I wouldn't have shut up, nor would anyone else on the 'losing' side. Hardly seems fair to insist that everyone should just stfu and soldier. This is not the Foreign Legion.
The EU might become an attractive option for UK in the future. By that, I mean that the older euro-skeptics die off and our replacements decide that, on balance, they'd prefer to rejoin.
Each generation is sovereign and can make its own decisions but it seems incredibly unlikely to me that the UK would seek to join the EU again once it has left. It is an organisation that has developed in ways not to our advantage and it would have to change out of all recognition for that balance to alter.
Where GOD is clearly right is point out that we were far more deeply integrated into this behemoth than its supporters wanted to admit and unwinding that integration is going to be very difficult, complicated and time consuming. I think it is inevitable that our relationship with the EU will continue to evolve and change for years and years after we have officially left.
Very unlikely, too, that they'd want us back.
O'Donnell's remarks are, however, pretty indicative of the new fall-back position of the cleverer REMAINers, some of whom I have talked with in recent weeks. Their approach is an extension of the argument Cameron used late in the referendum campaign i.e. 'leaving will be too much of a faff'.
The idea now is to string the process out as long as possible by producing (and exaggerating) plausible practical problems, in the hope that something turns up - recession, EU 'reform' - to allow the process to be stalled or reversed entirely. Failing that, a permanent EEA deal which can then be transformed back into EU associate membership down the line is the next line of defence.
The other thing we should note here is that O'Donnell's views are likely to be widely shared across the Civil Service. This is why the Civil Service needs to be cut out of the deal to the greatest extent possible,
O'Donnell's remarks are, however, pretty indicative of the new fall-back position of the cleverer REMAINers, some of whom I have talked with in recent weeks. Their approach is an extension of the argument Cameron used late in the referendum campaign i.e. 'leaving will be too much of a faff'.
The idea now is to string the process out as long as possible by producing (and exaggerating) plausible practical problems, in the hope that something turns up - recession, EU 'reform' - to allow the process to be stalled or reversed entirely. Failing that, a permanent EEA deal which can then be transformed back into EU associate membership down the line is the next line of defence.
The other thing we should note here is that O'Donnell's views are likely to be widely shared across the Civil Service. This is why the Civil Service needs to be cut out of the deal to the greatest extent possible,
And this to the spinners, it all goes wrong, so he must discard Blairite advice and return to the one true path.
Another member of justin's small straws society?
It is probably true tactic for defenders of an incompetent King and opponents not ready to take on thehis advisers.
Fundamental misunderstanding of medieval history there I'm afraid - one attacked the King's advisors because it was a proxy for the otherwise treasonous activity of questioning the King's decisions.
It's not a misunderstanding at all, since that was the point I was trying to make. That opponents didn't feel able to attack the King, for good reason in medieval times, so they attacked advisers. And defenders in modern times can similarly deflect onto said adviser, just as pre civil war opponents attack said advisers.
Nope - you're not getting it. Attacks on advisors were attacks on the king. It was neither defence of incompetence nor a halfway house.
You attacked the King's advisors, you'd better have won because otherwise you'll be stripped - of patronage and influence, at least, but almost certainly also of future justice, and likely your entire estates at some point.
I do get it, but you dont accept that because you're making a distinction without a difference from what I said or think I meant rather (you said attacking the advisers was a proxy for attacking the King and I agreed for christs sake, they attacked him through advisers as they coukd not him directly, then I extrapolated it to the modern realm which is slightly different) so I will point out I was using a metaphor about modern politics not medieval politics, my reference to kings was not literal.
The point was people attack the people around a leader as a prelude to an attack on said leader, as a proxy attack on that leader or because they cannot yet attack said leader, and leaders will shift blame onto the people around them to fend off attacks in their person, proxy or otherwise. Parliament attainded an adviser of Charles I, it was absolutely an attack on him, but, reluctantly, he still implicitly pretended it was about the adviser and not him by accepting the charge. Both sides play the game.
Note to self - don't use historical metaphors about modern politics less literalist pedants go crazy
The venn diagram of historical pedants and pb users is almost a perfect circle
F1: just on commentary, Tom Clarkson reckons a 40% chance of a safety car. I'd agree (2 in last 5 races have had one), hence the 2.62 tip on No Safety Car the other day. Not super, but value.
As I've pointed out before the lower divisions read like a list of marginal constituencies.
I think this is revealing about the misconceptions of Conservative supporters:
' One final point: when one of did this exercise before it was striking how many of the comments people made in response were about how they could not believe place X voted a certain way. This was almost always people not believing that place X had voted Conservative. (The standout example was Wolves – then in a constituency held by the Conservatives, something many people struggled to believe, although the seat has now changed hands back to Labour). Occasionally, maybe, this was just a confusion over the difference between where the ground was and the nature of a team’s fans – but it was also a belief that places like that couldn’t or somehow shouldn’t vote Conservative.
This may say something about the individual making those comments – or it may be about the image of the Conservative Party. Conservative voters don’t all wear bowler hats and live in mansions in Surrey or Chelsea, you know. The party wouldn’t have won quite so many elections if they did. '
I'm trying to recall the last time I saw someone wearing a bowler - other than as an ironic fashion gesture. I think it was mid 80s - a chappy used to catch the train with me in full City mode...bowler, umbrella, black jacket/striped trousers and briefcase.
' The club in the most leave-leaning constituency of all is Port Vale. The club in the most remain-leaning constituency is Bristol Rovers. The former is in Stoke-on-Trent North (predicted leave vote: 72 per cent), the latter is in Bristol West (21 per cent). Both are Labour-held seats. That kind of sums up the referendum – and Labour’s problem. '
That's one of the most interesting features of the result - the big divide between different types of Labour-voting area. Inner London, Brighton, Norwich, Bristol, university cities all hugely favoured Remain. But, non-London Metropolitan Borough Councils voted Leave by 55/45%, including every authority in the West Midlands and South Yorkshire.
It was interesting how many times BBC and ITV mentioned Manchester during the results programs.
Yet the numerical Remain majority in Manchester was smaller than the numerical Leave majorities in Barnsley, Doncaster, Dudley, Rotherham, Sandwell, Wakefield, Walsall and Wigan.
None of which ever got a mention.
I'm not sure if the 'experts' in the media are ignorant about the political geography of England or merely unwilling to depart from their metropolitan obsessions.
The same can also be said about Labour politicians.
F1: just on commentary, Tom Clarkson reckons a 40% chance of a safety car. I'd agree (2 in last 5 races have had one), hence the 2.62 tip on No Safety Car the other day. Not super, but value.
Safety Car is 1.6 on Betfair if anyone wants to lay off the above bet.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
For a start I would ban whinging from losers, trying to blame all their failures on something or other. The crap in this countyr need to man up and stop blaming other people for them failing. Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
I did plan on doing a piece at one time on zombie parties and was going to reference continuity SDP (Mk II).
My favourite example though is Common Wealth, which briefly achieved some prominence in WWII when it won a few by-elections against the wartime coalition and pointed up the growing popularity for the platform that Labour would be elected under in 1945. Despite Labour effectively making the party redundant, their only postwas MP defecting to Labour in 1946, and despite not standing candidates in any subsequent election, the party wasn't wound up until 1993.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
Free Irn Bru for all (unless you be Tory scum).
Up steps a PB cretin, convinced they are a wit rather than realising they are a half wit.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
For a start I would ban whinging from losers, trying to blame all their failures on something or other. The crap in this countyr need to man up and stop blaming other people for them failing. Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
' The club in the most leave-leaning constituency of all is Port Vale. The club in the most remain-leaning constituency is Bristol Rovers. The former is in Stoke-on-Trent North (predicted leave vote: 72 per cent), the latter is in Bristol West (21 per cent). Both are Labour-held seats. That kind of sums up the referendum – and Labour’s problem. '
That's one of the most interesting features of the result - the big divide between different types of Labour-voting area. Inner London, Brighton, Norwich, Bristol, university cities all hugely favoured Remain. But, non-London Metropolitan Borough Councils voted Leave by 55/45%, including every authority in the West Midlands and South Yorkshire.
It was interesting how many times BBC and ITV mentioned Manchester during the results programs.
Yet the numerical Remain majority in Manchester was smaller than the numerical Leave majorities in Barnsley, Doncaster, Dudley, Rotherham, Sandwell, Wakefield, Walsall and Wigan.
None of which ever got a mention.
I'm not sure if the 'experts' in the media are ignorant about the political geography of England or merely unwilling to depart from their metropolitan obsessions.
The same can also be said about Labour politicians.
Manchester is the only place that exists in England outside London, for most BBC people.
' The club in the most leave-leaning constituency of all is Port Vale. The club in the most remain-leaning constituency is Bristol Rovers. The former is in Stoke-on-Trent North (predicted leave vote: 72 per cent), the latter is in Bristol West (21 per cent). Both are Labour-held seats. That kind of sums up the referendum – and Labour’s problem. '
That's one of the most interesting features of the result - the big divide between different types of Labour-voting area. Inner London, Brighton, Norwich, Bristol, university cities all hugely favoured Remain. But, non-London Metropolitan Borough Councils voted Leave by 55/45%, including every authority in the West Midlands and South Yorkshire.
It was interesting how many times BBC and ITV mentioned Manchester during the results programs.
Yet the numerical Remain majority in Manchester was smaller than the numerical Leave majorities in Barnsley, Doncaster, Dudley, Rotherham, Sandwell, Wakefield, Walsall and Wigan.
None of which ever got a mention.
I'm not sure if the 'experts' in the media are ignorant about the political geography of England or merely unwilling to depart from their metropolitan obsessions.
The same can also be said about Labour politicians.
Manchester is the only place that exists in England outside London, for most BBC people.
Well, possibly Salford as well. Though they probably think that's Manchester too.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
For a start I would ban whinging from losers, trying to blame all their failures on something or other. The crap in this countyr need to man up and stop blaming other people for them failing. Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
Some people have zero self awareness.
You looking in the mirror numpty
PS: if you took my advice and got off your butt and worked hard like me, you may not be sitting about whining about being a loser and how its all others faults.
Arguably what was missing was the taxation of the very substantial capital gains of the wealthy on the back of policies like QE which increased asset values. The risks of driving very mobile capital out of the UK are not negligible but failure to tax these gains adequately results in growing inequality and insufficient revenues to reduce the deficit sharply enough.
Also missing was any willingness to attack obviously wasteful spending such as foreign aid. Reducing that to average G8 or OECD levels alone could have saved billions each year. I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't work in the aid industry who wants Britain to be an "aid superpower", or whatever Cameron's fatuous formulation was.
I met a street chugger the other day who was working for a mine clearance charity. It seems to me that working with those sorts of groups is the sort of thing that the Foreign Aid budget ought to be for.
F1: sounds like Hamilton will trundle in Q1 and that'll be it. If you can find reasonable odds, worth laying him to reach Q3/be top 10.
Edited extra bit: as always, not a dead cert, but worth looking at.
Agreed, he's not even looking at setting a quick time at the end of P3, preferring to run a long stint on the Softs as race preparation.
Also of interest is that the Supersoft tyres are good for only one lap, as it's a long lap here. Several drivers have had warnings for being off track at Radillon (Turn 4, left hander at the top of Eau Rouge), it's quite possible that someone will get kicked out earlier than expected, so it might be worth an outside chance on eg. McLaren to make Q3. Alonso is 11th in P3 so far.
' The club in the most leave-leaning constituency of all is Port Vale. The club in the most remain-leaning constituency is Bristol Rovers. The former is in Stoke-on-Trent North (predicted leave vote: 72 per cent), the latter is in Bristol West (21 per cent). Both are Labour-held seats. That kind of sums up the referendum – and Labour’s problem. '
That's one of the most interesting features of the result - the big divide between different types of Labour-voting area. Inner London, Brighton, Norwich, Bristol, university cities all hugely favoured Remain. But, non-London Metropolitan Borough Councils voted Leave by 55/45%, including every authority in the West Midlands and South Yorkshire.
One of the few premier league clubs in the Premiership, Chelsea, was in a constituency which voted Remain and was in the minority of premier league clubs in areas doing so
Arguably what was missing was the taxation of the very substantial capital gains of the wealthy on the back of policies like QE which increased asset values. The risks of driving very mobile capital out of the UK are not negligible but failure to tax these gains adequately results in growing inequality and insufficient revenues to reduce the deficit sharply enough.
Also missing was any willingness to attack obviously wasteful spending such as foreign aid. Reducing that to average G8 or OECD levels alone could have saved billions each year. I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't work in the aid industry who wants Britain to be an "aid superpower", or whatever Cameron's fatuous formulation was.
I met a street chugger the other day who was working for a mine clearance charity. It seems to me that working with those sorts of groups is the sort of thing that the Foreign Aid budget ought to be for.
Probably the Halo Trust, in which case it does get govt funding.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
For a start I would ban whinging from losers, trying to blame all their failures on something or other. The crap in this countyr need to man up and stop blaming other people for them failing. Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
Can we start by banning whinging from the Scottish referendum losers, From Nicola down?
For the first time since 1989 I feel we are lead by someone who can lead, who decides on something and does it and does not compromise and seek consensus and avoiding trouble all the time like Jim Hacker.
Don;t have to agree with all her policies just feel that the country is in safe hands that will not take any S***.
Amazing that on both occasions it is a woman in the post. Have the 1930s dictators made it impossible for men with firm leadership characteristics to be elected?
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
For a start I would ban whinging from losers, trying to blame all their failures on something or other. The crap in this countyr need to man up and stop blaming other people for them failing. Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
And this to the spinners, it all goes wrong, so he must discard Blairite advice and return to the one true path.
Another member of justin's small straws society?
It is probably true tactic for defenders of an incompetent King and opponents not ready to take on thehis advisers.
Fundamental misunderstanding of medieval history there I'm afraid - one attacked the King's advisors because it was a proxy for the otherwise treasonous activity of questioning the King's decisions.
It's not a misunderstanding at all, since that was the point I was trying to make. That opponents didn't feel able to attack the King, for good reason in medieval times, so they attacked advisers. And defenders in modern times can similarly deflect onto said adviser, just as pre civil war opponents attack said advisers.
Nope - you're not getting it. Attacks on advisors were attacks on the king. It was neither defence of incompetence nor a halfway house.
You attacked the King's advisors, you'd better have won because otherwise you'll be stripped - of patronage and influence, at least, but almost certainly also of future justice, and likely your entire estates at some point.
snip for length
The point was people attack the people around a leader as a prelude to an attack on said leader, as a proxy attack on that leader or because they cannot yet attack said leader, and leaders will shift blame onto the people around them to fend off attacks in their person, proxy or otherwise. Parliament attainded an adviser of Charles I, it was absolutely an attack on him, but, reluctantly, he still implicitly pretended it was about the adviser and not him by accepting the charge. Both sides play the game.
Note to self - don't use historical metaphors about modern politics less literalist pedants go crazy
The venn diagram of historical pedants and pb users is almost a perfect circle
To be metapedantic - venn diagrams are topographical, and therefore agnostic about geometry, so perfect doesn't come into it. And do you mean an annulus?
Mr. Bedfordshire, might be that men want to be seen as having empathy, whereas toughness is more prized for women (who want to avoid being seen as soft).
Monday It’s a quiet day, so I’ve taken all of my supporters in the Parliamentary Labour Party to the cinema to see Swallows and Amazons. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough seats.
“Yes there are,” says the usher, shining his torch.
Not if we all want to sit together, I explain.
“But there are over 40 of you,” says the usher. “And you didn’t book.”
There are only about 15, which is why the CLPD or whatever they call themselves now want the nominations bar to be brought down to 5%. Any higher than that and the far left won't be able to nominate a candidate to replace Corbyn when they eventually need to.
I did plan on doing a piece at one time on zombie parties and was going to reference continuity SDP (Mk II).
My favourite example though is Common Wealth, which briefly achieved some prominence in WWII when it won a few by-elections against the wartime coalition and pointed up the growing popularity for the platform that Labour would be elected under in 1945. Despite Labour effectively making the party redundant, their only postwas MP defecting to Labour in 1946, and despite not standing candidates in any subsequent election, the party wasn't wound up until 1993.
That'd make a superb BH thread - great trivia fun.
1. I'm 66 and I've never seen a bowler hat in real life. 2. Inner London, Bristol and Norwich were the three largest cities in England before the industrial revolution.
Anyone know why the value of stocks and shares has risen by about 15% since February?
The currency devaluation has helped a lot - most of the larger listed companies book sales in other currencies, so sales measured in Sterling have risen. eg banks, oil companies do a lot of their trade in USD.
"Good morning. Can anyone please help. I am a single mum and own 3 properties, one we live in and two I rent out. I make next to no profit at the rental only just covers the mortgage payments. I am concerned that when George Osborne new rental tax rules are fully implemented it will not only increase the amount I pay tax but also as the rental will be calculated as income and not just profit then I won't be able to get wtc/ctc as I'm presently on 27k aurally so with the new changes I would be on about 38k. Feel that I'm being forced to sell or move overseas whereas if I had not bothered I would have been entitled to all the benefits imaginable.....feels so unfair for trying to do your best"
The good news is that as and when Tax Credits are replaced by Universal Credit she won't get a penny as the rented out houses will be class as Capital and means tested.
Suspect she will also be deemed as self employed. Self employed people will be deemed to be earning 30h per week x minimum wage - even if they are not earning that.
An interesting response on HPC about a side effect of the S24 rental income changes:
"Nope its not a wind up nor Trolling - its a side effect of the S24 changes and probably intentional...
Her Current income is £25k income and £2k profit on the BTL after all costs (including mortgage interest payments) say total (£27k).
As of next year her income is £25k + £13k from the BTLs (profit on the BTL properties - excluding mortgage repayments) total £38k.
There is then a separate allowance on your tax return allowing you to deduct part of the interest paid on the mortgages so she won't be paying any tax on the £11k of interest paid so tax wise she isn't worse off.
The issue comes on her tax credit form she where she will have to show a gross income of £38k from next year rather than the £27k it showed for this year..
For the first time since 1989 I feel we are lead by someone who can lead, who decides on something and does it and does not compromise and seek consensus and avoiding trouble all the time like Jim Hacker.
Don;t have to agree with all her policies just feel that the country is in safe hands that will not take any S***.
Amazing that on both occasions it is a woman in the post. Have the 1930s dictators made it impossible for men with firm leadership characteristics to be elected?
Rather early days to make that assessment of Mrs May, although the early signs are consistent with it.
If it is indeed so, it is perhaps because women get a harder fight in climbing the political ladder (at least in the Conservative party which has no All-Women Shortlists, to its great credit).
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
I don't think that is true, and I think that you are making lazy assumptions.
For example the Liberal Democrats have been quite outspoken on the subject, opposing authoritarians from both Left and Right. An example here on control orders:
Indeed there has been remarkably little criticism of our government for making a politcal prisoner out of Anjem Choudhary for what he has said rather than what he has done. A very interesting and heavily authoritarian way of dealing with a repellant individual.
There are authoritarians on both left and right, and liberals on both sides too. These are on separate axes.
F1: checked the forecast. yesterday it had a very low chance of rain, today there's a reasonably high chance of a thunderstorm during the race. So, if you haven't bet on the safety car yet, I'd avoid it.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
I don't think that is true, and I think that you are making lazy assumptions.
For example the Liberal Democrats have been quite outspoken on the subject, opposing authoritarians from both Left and Right. An example here on control orders:
Indeed there has been remarkably little criticism of our government for making a politcal prisoner out of Anjem Choudhary for what he has said rather than what he has done. A very interesting and heavily authoritarian way of dealing with a repellant individual.
There are authoritarians on both left and right, and liberals on both sides too. These are on separate axes.
Choudhry crossed the line into advocating support for murder, IMHO.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
I don't think that is true, and I think that you are making lazy assumptions.
For example the Liberal Democrats have been quite outspoken on the subject, opposing authoritarians from both Left and Right. An example here on control orders:
Indeed there has been remarkably little criticism of our government for making a politcal prisoner out of Anjem Choudhary for what he has said rather than what he has done. A very interesting and heavily authoritarian way of dealing with a repellant individual.
There are authoritarians on both left and right, and liberals on both sides too. These are on separate axes.
I wasn't thinking of the Lib Dems, as much as I was thinking of what's going on in the universities and in Labour, where people actively seek to avoid the expression of views that they don't agree with, safe spaces, banning speakers etc. It's more prevalent in the US but has seemed to spread across the Pond in the past couple of years.
Anjem Choudray - no sympathy. He's tried for decades to walk the fine line, stepped the wrong side of it in calling (and I paraphrase slightly) for people to join ISIS and destroy the Western way of life.
Anyone know why the value of stocks and shares has risen by about 15% since February?
When the currency devalues, then items with tangible assets and foreign earnings go up in value. 70% of FTSE earnings occur outside the UK.
There are also changes elsewhere, in particularly commodities and the China slowdown seem to have bottomed out.
It does occur to me that the Brexit vote, by devaluing the pound sharply, may well have saved the pension industry which is heavily invested in said stocks which will, as 70% are overseas, inevitably rise in proportion to the fall in the pound.
Devaluation will also be inflationary all round which will be good all round (unless you have a large mortgage or other debts)
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
For a start I would ban whinging from losers, trying to blame all their failures on something or other. The crap in this countyr need to man up and stop blaming other people for them failing. Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
Can we start by banning whinging from the Scottish referendum losers, From Nicola down?
*Stands by for incoming turnips!*
I have never heard her whining , others yes but not her.
Where was freedom of speech with the Danish cartoons? Or Jesus and Mo, when Newsnight attacked an atheist for having the temerity to draw a cartoon not in accordance with Islamic rules? Or the ban on bikini ads on the Tube? Or 'cultural sensitivities' forestalling action in Rotherham for a decade and a half? Or the pretence by a cretinous media that terrorism is mental illness committed by men called Dave?
Mr. L, well, quite.
Mr. kle4, one is a bastion of scientific authority.
Sure, it's not universal but society is considerably more liberal now that it ever was in the past in any number of ways. Even the PC prescription on free speech seems under attack.
It's very wierd that those who now call themselves "liberal" are those most favour of restricting freedom of speech.
I don't think that is true, and I think that you are making lazy assumptions.
For example the Liberal Democrats have been quite outspoken on the subject, opposing authoritarians from both Left and Right. An example here on control orders:
Indeed there has been remarkably little criticism of our government for making a politcal prisoner out of Anjem Choudhary for what he has said rather than what he has done. A very interesting and heavily authoritarian way of dealing with a repellant individual.
There are authoritarians on both left and right, and liberals on both sides too. These are on separate axes.
Choudhry crossed the line into advocating support for murder, IMHO.
One could say the same of our Leader of the opposition and shadow chancellor. Should they be imprisoned for their views?
My point is that attacks on free speech come from both sides of the political spectrum.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have these halfwits not got some important stuff to do , are they so f&&&&ng useless this is the best they can come up with as the country goes down the pan.
Have you? All you ever seem to do is moan about any and all policy decisions.
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
For a start I would ban whinging from losers, trying to blame all their failures on something or other. The crap in this countyr need to man up and stop blaming other people for them failing. Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
Some people have zero self awareness.
You looking in the mirror numpty
PS: if you took my advice and got off your butt and worked hard like me, you may not be sitting about whining about being a loser and how its all others faults.
Anyone know why the value of stocks and shares has risen by about 15% since February?
When the currency devalues, then items with tangible assets and foreign earnings go up in value. 70% of FTSE earnings occur outside the UK.
There are also changes elsewhere, in particularly commodities and the China slowdown seem to have bottomed out.
It does occur to me that the Brexit vote, by devaluing the pound sharply, may well have saved the pension industry which is heavily invested in said stocks which will, as 70% are overseas, inevitably rise in proportion to the fall in the pound.
Devaluation will also be inflationary all round which will be good all round (unless you have a large mortgage or other debts)
I think that low interest rates on gilts and thereby annuities will do more harm to pensions.
I expect further devaluation to kick in in the autumn as the Brexit phoney war ends, and again when A50 is invoked. I am moving my equities accordingly. So far my equity position has benefited tremendously from the Brexit vote (at least priced in Sterling), indeed my winnings here are about 100times the money I won with the bookies by betting on Brexit.
1. I'm 66 and I've never seen a bowler hat in real life. 2. Inner London, Bristol and Norwich were the three largest cities in England before the industrial revolution.
Trivia. I’m a bit older and I’ve seen a bowler hat worn. My father had one, and when he died my son took it. Don’t know why! People used to wear them going to work in London on the Southend to Fenchurch St (now C2C) line.
And this to the spinners, it all goes wrong, so he must discard Blairite advice and return to the one true path.
Another member of justin's small straws society?
It is probably true tactic for defenders of an incompetent King and opponents not ready to take on thehis advisers.
Fundamental misunderstanding of medieval history there I'm afraid - one attacked the King's advisors because it was a proxy for the otherwise treasonous activity of questioning the King's decisions.
It's not a misunderstanding at all, since that was the point I was trying to make. That opponents didn't feel able to attack the King, for good reason in medieval times, so they attacked advisers. And defenders in modern times can similarly deflect onto said adviser, just as pre civil war opponents attack said advisers.
Nope - you're not getting it. Attacks on advisors were attacks on the king. It was neither defence of incompetence nor a halfway house.
You attacked the King's advisors, you'd better have won because otherwise you'll be stripped - of patronage and influence, at least, but almost certainly also of future justice, and likely your entire estates at some point.
snip for length
The point was people attack the people around a leader as a prelude to an attack on said leader, as a proxy attack on that leader or because they cannot yet attack said leader, and leaders will shift blame onto the people around them to fend off attacks in their person, proxy or otherwise. Parliament attainded an adviser of Charles I, it was absolutely an attack on him, but, reluctantly, he still implicitly pretended it was about the adviser and not him by accepting the charge. Both sides play the game.
Note to self - don't use historical metaphors about modern politics less literalist pedants go crazy
The venn diagram of historical pedants and pb users is almost a perfect circle
To be metapedantic - venn diagrams are topographical, and therefore agnostic about geometry, so perfect doesn't come into it. And do you mean an annulus?
1. I'm 66 and I've never seen a bowler hat in real life. 2. Inner London, Bristol and Norwich were the three largest cities in England before the industrial revolution.
Trivia. I’m a bit older and I’ve seen a bowler hat worn. My father had one, and when he died my son took it. Don’t know why! People used to wear them going to work in London on the Southend to Fenchurch St (now C2C) line.
There is a fellow in Leicester who always wears one. He lives on Humberstone rd, a particularly multicultural area. He also has a bushy moustache, wears a tweed suit and always carries a rolled umbrella. I see him most weeks, and he has dressed like this for years. I wonder if he is a TinTin fan.
In Leicester a good deal of personal eccenticity is tolerated and indeed normal. Along the same road I often see teenage Somali girls wearing miniskirts or hotpants combined with headscarves. A burkini for shopping perhaps. Such things are unremarkeable here.
Comments
What would be your platform for increasing equality of opportunity in this country?
It usually follows them telling me I can't say something - like Merkel opening the border was a poor policy decision because it will encourage more migration, ending in needless deaths in transit.
For many, especially of my generation, attacking the right and centre on issues like accepting migration, transgender rights and supranational bodies are seen as natural and inherent proxies of liberalism, despite the policy proposals and implementation themselves being entirely the opposite.
Arguably what was missing was the taxation of the very substantial capital gains of the wealthy on the back of policies like QE which increased asset values. The risks of driving very mobile capital out of the UK are not negligible but failure to tax these gains adequately results in growing inequality and insufficient revenues to reduce the deficit sharply enough.
You attacked the King's advisors, you'd better have won because otherwise you'll be stripped - of patronage and influence, at least, but almost certainly also of future justice, and likely your entire estates at some point.
Though I get confused myself - political compass tells me I should vote for plaid cymru
I can't get excited by O'Donnell, or the outrage from parliamentarians about May's plan for A50 invocation.
If Remain had won, I wouldn't have shut up, nor would anyone else on the 'losing' side. Hardly seems fair to insist that everyone should just stfu and soldier. This is not the Foreign Legion.
The EU might become an attractive option for UK in the future. By that, I mean that the older euro-skeptics die off and our replacements decide that, on balance, they'd prefer to rejoin.
Re: PC - Wow - I've literally no idea what policies would trigger that result...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/26/how-football-can-explain-politics-labour-dominate-the-premier-le/
As I've pointed out before the lower divisions read like a list of marginal constituencies.
I think this is revealing about the misconceptions of Conservative supporters:
' One final point: when one of did this exercise before it was striking how many of the comments people made in response were about how they could not believe place X voted a certain way. This was almost always people not believing that place X had voted Conservative. (The standout example was Wolves – then in a constituency held by the Conservatives, something many people struggled to believe, although the seat has now changed hands back to Labour). Occasionally, maybe, this was just a confusion over the difference between where the ground was and the nature of a team’s fans – but it was also a belief that places like that couldn’t or somehow shouldn’t vote Conservative.
This may say something about the individual making those comments – or it may be about the image of the Conservative Party. Conservative voters don’t all wear bowler hats and live in mansions in Surrey or Chelsea, you know. The party wouldn’t have won quite so many elections if they did. '
Loved the rearranging folk records bit...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/26/from-cannes-to-bavaria-politicians-fiddle-with-burkini-bans-whil/
Where GOD is clearly right is point out that we were far more deeply integrated into this behemoth than its supporters wanted to admit and unwinding that integration is going to be very difficult, complicated and time consuming. I think it is inevitable that our relationship with the EU will continue to evolve and change for years and years after we have officially left.
If MPs want to give so much to overseas charities, let them use their own money, not the taxpayer's.
State Dept. lawyers say it now expects to release the last of the calendars around Dec. 30. https://t.co/CwpMEmT1hJ
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/08/20/how-football-can-explain-the-eu-referendum/
' The club in the most leave-leaning constituency of all is Port Vale. The club in the most remain-leaning constituency is Bristol Rovers. The former is in Stoke-on-Trent North (predicted leave vote: 72 per cent), the latter is in Bristol West (21 per cent). Both are Labour-held seats. That kind of sums up the referendum – and Labour’s problem. '
The point was people attack the people around a leader as a prelude to an attack on said leader, as a proxy attack on that leader or because they cannot yet attack said leader, and leaders will shift blame onto the people around them to fend off attacks in their person, proxy or otherwise. Parliament attainded an adviser of Charles I, it was absolutely an attack on him, but, reluctantly, he still implicitly pretended it was about the adviser and not him by accepting the charge. Both sides play the game.
Note to self - don't use historical metaphors about modern politics less literalist pedants go crazy
Without wishing to label anyone as 'nasty' or even 'nastier-than-the-other', it seems clear as day to me that people who engage in such spiteful, angry behaviour simply cannot produce any semblance of a 'kinder, gentler politics'.
If this is 'kinder, gentler', give me the old-fashioned less kind, less gentle - it did at least seem to have a few boundaries set on behaviour. This sort of behaviour doesn't even rise to 'seem to'.
And good morning, everyone.
Edited extra bit: as always, not a dead cert, but worth looking at.
Traditional "feed the poor" and inoculate the sick aid has its place but what is not acceptable (to me) is using UK taxpayers money to provide state spending in countries who choose to spend their money on more exciting things like space programs or mistresses for the elite.
OTOH spending money to keep refugees from Syria in the middle east seems a very good idea and that sort of policy should be our focus going forward.
Completely agree on your second paragraph. There are a lot of over-optimistic Brexiteers who don't seem to appreciate that Europe will always loom large in British affairs.
And a good day to all, off to the sun.
http://www.socialdemocraticparty.co.uk/
O'Donnell's remarks are, however, pretty indicative of the new fall-back position of the cleverer REMAINers, some of whom I have talked with in recent weeks. Their approach is an extension of the argument Cameron used late in the referendum campaign i.e. 'leaving will be too much of a faff'.
The idea now is to string the process out as long as possible by producing (and exaggerating) plausible practical problems, in the hope that something turns up - recession, EU 'reform' - to allow the process to be stalled or reversed entirely. Failing that, a permanent EEA deal which can then be transformed back into EU associate membership down the line is the next line of defence.
The other thing we should note here is that O'Donnell's views are likely to be widely shared across the Civil Service. This is why the Civil Service needs to be cut out of the deal to the greatest extent possible,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3760960/Merkel-quite-fancied-Cameron-claims-biographer-just-imagine-bad-EU-deal-d-offered-hadn-t.html
Yet the numerical Remain majority in Manchester was smaller than the numerical Leave majorities in Barnsley, Doncaster, Dudley, Rotherham, Sandwell, Wakefield, Walsall and Wigan.
None of which ever got a mention.
I'm not sure if the 'experts' in the media are ignorant about the political geography of England or merely unwilling to depart from their metropolitan obsessions.
The same can also be said about Labour politicians.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3760934/More-half-Britons-want-WILLIAM-king-just-one-four-saying-Charles.html
As ever, Leeds was more interesting than Manchester (split right down the middle).
Interesting comment about the focus on a big city rather than smaller ones or towns.
Since you are such a hot shot , give us your great wisdom Mr equal opportunity. My solution would be get out and work hard and stop trying to blame everything but yourself for your failures.
My favourite example though is Common Wealth, which briefly achieved some prominence in WWII when it won a few by-elections against the wartime coalition and pointed up the growing popularity for the platform that Labour would be elected under in 1945. Despite Labour effectively making the party redundant, their only postwas MP defecting to Labour in 1946, and despite not standing candidates in any subsequent election, the party wasn't wound up until 1993.
PS: if you took my advice and got off your butt and worked hard like me, you may not be sitting about whining about being a loser and how its all others faults.
Also of interest is that the Supersoft tyres are good for only one lap, as it's a long lap here. Several drivers have had warnings for being off track at Radillon (Turn 4, left hander at the top of Eau Rouge), it's quite possible that someone will get kicked out earlier than expected, so it might be worth an outside chance on eg. McLaren to make Q3. Alonso is 11th in P3 so far.
*Stands by for incoming turnips!*
For the first time since 1989 I feel we are lead by someone who can lead, who decides on something and does it and does not compromise and seek consensus and avoiding trouble all the time like Jim Hacker.
Don;t have to agree with all her policies just feel that the country is in safe hands that will not take any S***.
Amazing that on both occasions it is a woman in the post. Have the 1930s dictators made it impossible for men with firm leadership characteristics to be elected?
"Good morning.
Can anyone please help.
I am a single mum and own 3 properties, one we live in and two I rent out.
I make next to no profit at the rental only just covers the mortgage payments.
I am concerned that when George Osborne new rental tax rules are fully implemented it will not only increase the amount I pay tax but also as the rental will be calculated as income and not just profit then I won't be able to get wtc/ctc as I'm presently on 27k aurally so with the new changes I would be on about 38k.
Feel that I'm being forced to sell or move overseas whereas if I had not bothered I would have been entitled to all the benefits imaginable.....feels so unfair for trying to do your best"
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5516143
The good news is that as and when Tax Credits are replaced by Universal Credit she won't get a penny as the rented out houses will be class as Capital and means tested.
Suspect she will also be deemed as self employed. Self employed people will be deemed to be earning 30h per week x minimum wage - even if they are not earning that.
An interesting response on HPC about a side effect of the S24 rental income changes:
"Nope its not a wind up nor Trolling - its a side effect of the S24 changes and probably intentional...
Her Current income is £25k income and £2k profit on the BTL after all costs (including mortgage interest payments) say total (£27k).
As of next year her income is £25k + £13k from the BTLs (profit on the BTL properties - excluding mortgage repayments) total £38k.
There is then a separate allowance on your tax return allowing you to deduct part of the interest paid on the mortgages so she won't be paying any tax on the £11k of interest paid so tax wise she isn't worse off.
The issue comes on her tax credit form she where she will have to show a gross income of £38k from next year rather than the £27k it showed for this year..
Lucky for Labour, OCS uses zero hour contracts. Likely the reason it is able to step in at such short notice https://t.co/Hz5qLrj7mv
If it is indeed so, it is perhaps because women get a harder fight in climbing the political ladder (at least in the Conservative party which has no All-Women Shortlists, to its great credit).
For example the Liberal Democrats have been quite outspoken on the subject, opposing authoritarians from both Left and Right. An example here on control orders:
http://www.libdems.org.uk/extreme-views-are-best-defeated-by-free-speech
Indeed there has been remarkably little criticism of our government for making a politcal prisoner out of Anjem Choudhary for what he has said rather than what he has done. A very interesting and heavily authoritarian way of dealing with a repellant individual.
There are authoritarians on both left and right, and liberals on both sides too. These are on separate axes.
https://twitter.com/scotnational/status/769270614708412417
There are also changes elsewhere, in particularly commodities and the China slowdown seem to have bottomed out.
Trump wins New Hampshire by 15%!
Good for Trump in Maine, Wisconsin and Michigan (And possibly Colorado), good for Clinton in Pennsylvania and Florida.
Overall better for Clinton due to P and F being so pivotal.
http://theweek.com/articles/445434/how-liberalism-became-intolerant-dogma
Anjem Choudray - no sympathy. He's tried for decades to walk the fine line, stepped the wrong side of it in calling (and I paraphrase slightly) for people to join ISIS and destroy the Western way of life.
Devaluation will also be inflationary all round which will be good all round (unless you have a large mortgage or other debts)
My point is that attacks on free speech come from both sides of the political spectrum.
I think Brendan O'Neil covers it well here: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/free-anjem-choudary/18661#.V8FpbHRwbqA
Now it may well be that interning people for their political views should be done, but we should not varnish what we are doing.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/belgium-pre-qualifying-2016.html
No tip, but there is actually some interesting stuff (admittedly, I copied it from Mr. Max, but there we are).
I expect further devaluation to kick in in the autumn as the Brexit phoney war ends, and again when A50 is invoked. I am moving my equities accordingly. So far my equity position has benefited tremendously from the Brexit vote (at least priced in Sterling), indeed my winnings here are about 100times the money I won with the bookies by betting on Brexit.
Exactly
People used to wear them going to work in London on the Southend to Fenchurch St (now C2C) line.
Well played.
In Leicester a good deal of personal eccenticity is tolerated and indeed normal. Along the same road I often see teenage Somali girls wearing miniskirts or hotpants combined with headscarves. A burkini for shopping perhaps. Such things are unremarkeable here.