Mr. Meeks, the reporting around refugees etc is horrendously one-sided. We're giving vast sums supporting refugee camps near to the theatre of war, from which those currently in need of refuge will be able to much more easily return once the war ends.
Money also goes a lot further that way, but it gets reported very little.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
Yes, that's worrying. I was briefly heartened after the Brexit vote when Boris appeared and proclaimed that this didn't mean we'd be hauling up the drawbridge to become inward-looking xenophobes. But then came Trump and the British Right's zeal to copy his every move like adoring children. Perhaps we'll just have to accept that the dream of British internationalism is dead.
One minute youre telling us with all those banks moving away we're headed for huge unemployment, next minute therer's a dearth of talent for all the demand.
I just can't see any possible path which ends with Benn as leader of the Labour party and the thread header does not suggest one. The question of whether he would be a good leader is therefore entirely academic. Putting that aside he made one excellent speech on Syria which took a line unlikely to be supported by the majority of the membership. What else has he done in his 18 years in Parliament?
His main government job was as Secretary of State for International Development where his principal task was overseeing the reconstruction of Iraq after the Gulf war. Does anyone think that went well? Anyone at all? After that he was SoS for the Environment dealing with bovine tuberculosis. Not a startling success either.
He seems a nice man, genial like his father and it may be that the Labour party needs a bit of tea and sympathy to try and patch itself together after the shambles of the last 2 years. But an alternative PM? You're having a laugh.
If you are competing with the world you need the best in the world. These are not coffee shop or lorry driving jobs, but highly-skilled positions in critically important, high tax revenue sectors. Of course, we need better training and better rates of productivity - and are issues that have dogged the UK for decades - but we only compound challenges if we become less attractive to the kind of people, local and foreign, who pay high taxes and build businesses.
If you have essentially unlimited skilled migration, as we currently have with the EU at least, there's little incentive to fix the persistent problems. Economically it might even be the most efficient thing to do, but don't expect people who are losing out or perceive themselves to be losing out to support it.
If tighter immigration rules reduces immigration, and lets face it we will likely still blow past the 100k per year aspirational target, and that forces us to address the problems we have that might be a good thing.
I'm not anti-immigration, far from it, but I'm highly skeptical of claims that we need loose immigration rules because we aren't producing enough home-grown talent. My hunch is that we aren't trying hard enough in the first place.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
Who and on what timescale?
In the long term, the "throw the doors wide open" fix was rejected back on June 23rd as you may recall. If we have a shortage of highly skilled people, and I would in part suggest that we are doing a lousy job of putting the right people in the right careers, then we need to educate and train them. That's the real fix, not the Ponzi scheme of endless immigration.
We did not vote to end immigration on 23rd June.
We voted to take back control - so UK voters can in future decide what level of immigration from the EU they want.
We didn't vote to take back control. We voted to leave the EU.
Indeed we did. Then in accordance with our system of government we placed that in the hands of our elected government to enact, if we dont like how they enact it we throw them out and elect someone else. The current government appears to be going for a take back control approach, if you dont like how that works out I am sure one of Messrs Corbyn, Farron or Prof Nuttall KCMG DSO(Bar) would welcome your vote in 2020.
Yes I see that they are going for that approach. My point was that they could have taken any approach, and Brexit can still mean anything. The trouble is that many people, a large number of whom seem to populate PB, have no idea what taking back control actually means.
And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO.
Can you guess - without Googling - who it was who said this?
"A surfeit of lawyers is a sign of a civilization in decline."
(It was written in the card I got from a boyfriend the day I passed my Bar exams. He didn't last. )
I have no idea who said it, but I know Churchill said "Jaw, jaw is better than war, war".
Lawyers may be prone to producing reams of paper covered in unreadable gobble-de-gook but surely that is a better way of settling things than beating each other senseless ...
could we have a compromise and just beat lawyers senseless ?
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
Labour cannot begin solving any of its more deep-seated problems until Jeremy Corbyn goes. So, for now, he is Labour's problem. And he is one that will take another 18 months or so to solve, unless the unions get involved.
Whilst that's true, it's also true that a botched, divisive change of leader, especially one which catapults a novice into the top position and which does not address the strategic issues, won't help. In fact it would probably make things worse.
I agree. I would rather wait 18 months and get it right than go again this year and get it wrong. yet again. A pre-requisite for the next Labour leader is to ensure that the best talent in the PLP is on the opposition front bench. I know you don't think there is much (just as I struggle to see where it is on the government side), but I think that a leader who can call on the likes of Cooper, Jarvis, Umuna, Kendall, Leslie, Nandy, Starmer, Benn, Ashworth, Kinnock and even Ed Miliband to be in his/her shadow team is going to be in a better position to oppose Mrs May and her cabinet, and to start thinking more deeply about Labour's future, than one who has Richard Burgon by his side.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
They will be. By issuing visas, and where necessary making the compensation package more attractive just like every major city outside the EU does.
But with visa-free access and high salaries, the UK is already becoming a less popular destination for high fliers from the EU. And, just as important, it looks like more British-born high-fliers are seeking opportunities abroad. Is the solution to make the visa rules for non-EU citizens more liberal than they are currently?
No the solution is to wait a bit. There is a lot of uncertainty at the moment and people are reacting to it. No point in coming here and setting up shop if they government might do something stupid, or even fall before we leave and be replaced by someone who might do something even more stupid. When things become clearer, things will pick up.
Mrs C, when the Jews were rebelling against the Romans, they also sent lawyers to Rome to protest and litigate when the Romans contravened any of the laws that governed Judea.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
I don't think productivity is a major issue in the high-wage, fast-growth industries that tend to attract the world class talent.
Seems that Trump appears to have forgotten that he is supposed to be serving the entire country, not just the States who voted for him.
"The source is quoted as saying:
“The President has no incentive in helping the state of California. The state harbors more illegal immigrants than any other state and has multiple sanctuary cities that violate federal laws. The state very publicly supported Hillary Clinton throughout the election and the President views the state as being responsible for his loss in the popular vote, something he has had trouble with accepting. They have also recently threatened to leave the Union through their #CalExit campaign, and the President sees this as an opportunity to let them deal with the consequences of their exit. There is a sickness within the liberals in this country that they are not willing to address. Until they understand what ails them can they hope to find the cure. This is a step in the right direction in finding the #CureForWellness. “
Mrs C, when the Jews were rebelling against the Romans, they also sent lawyers to Rome to protest and litigate when the Romans contravened any of the laws that governed Judea.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
Plus the Jews were split into two rival factions, The People's Front of Judea and The Judean People's Front.
Can you guess - without Googling - who it was who said this?
"A surfeit of lawyers is a sign of a civilization in decline."
(It was written in the card I got from a boyfriend the day I passed my Bar exams. He didn't last. )
I have no idea who said it, but I know Churchill said "Jaw, jaw is better than war, war".
Lawyers may be prone to producing reams of paper covered in unreadable gobble-de-gook but surely that is a better way of settling things than beating each other senseless ...
could we have a compromise and just beat lawyers senseless ?
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
I don't think productivity is a major issue in the high-wage, fast-growth industries that tend to attract the world class talent.
youre just confusing high wages with "talent"
these fast growth industries appear to be having no discernable effect on our economy or else we would be growing above our long term growth trend
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
Yes, that's worrying. I was briefly heartened after the Brexit vote when Boris appeared and proclaimed that this didn't mean we'd be hauling up the drawbridge to become inward-looking xenophobes. But then came Trump and the British Right's zeal to copy his every move like adoring children. Perhaps we'll just have to accept that the dream of British internationalism is dead.
Trump's election seems to have had as big an effect on the critical analysis faculties of many on the left-of-centre in Britain as in the US.
Can you name a single British policy that's been affected by his election? To clarify, I mean a policy that wasn't in place before November that's subsequently been introduced and which mirrors Trump's, or which has been modified to match, or which has been scrapped.
I see no evidence whatsoever of a 'love-in' and it's simply wishful thinking to believe that there is one.
It's not just policies, it's mood music. People abroad see the news reports and they hear what politicians say. Whether rightly or wrongly, that affects perceptions. We need to be aware of that. Slogans and statements designed for domestic consumption are also heard overseas.
That's fair comment but I don't think it necessarily contradicts what I was saying.
If you are competing with the world you need the best in the world. These are not coffee shop or lorry driving jobs, but highly-skilled positions in critically important, high tax revenue sectors. Of course, we need better training and better rates of productivity - and are issues that have dogged the UK for decades - but we only compound challenges if we become less attractive to the kind of people, local and foreign, who pay high taxes and build businesses.
If you have essentially unlimited skilled migration, as we currently have with the EU at least, there's little incentive to fix the persistent problems. Economically it might even be the most efficient thing to do, but don't expect people who are losing out or perceive themselves to be losing out to support it.
If tighter immigration rules reduces immigration, and lets face it we will likely still blow past the 100k per year aspirational target, and that forces us to address the problems we have that might be a good thing.
I'm not anti-immigration, far from it, but I'm highly skeptical of claims that we need loose immigration rules because we aren't producing enough home-grown talent. My hunch is that we aren't trying hard enough in the first place.
We need the right immigration rules. That may well mean tighter controls at the lower end (though with high employment rates that is going to be tricky), but at the top end we are competing globally and so need to bring in the best. I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
Mrs C, when the Jews were rebelling against the Romans, they also sent lawyers to Rome to protest and litigate when the Romans contravened any of the laws that governed Judea.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
You must also read A Long Way to Shiloh by Lionel Davidson - possibly the best and funniest thriller ever written.
Mr. Z, I'll make a note but my to-read list is very slow moving, I'm only reading about 20 pages a day at the moment (writing a lot reduces the amount I read, I find).
I agree. I would rather wait 18 months and get it right than go again this year and get it wrong. yet again. A pre-requisite for the next Labour leader is to ensure that the best talent in the PLP is on the opposition front bench. I know you don't think there is much (just as I struggle to see where it is on the government side), but I think that a leader who can call on the likes of Cooper, Jarvis, Umuna, Kendall, Leslie, Nandy, Starmer, Benn, Ashworth, Kinnock and even Ed Miliband to be in his/her shadow team is going to be in a better position to oppose Mrs May and her cabinet, and to start thinking more deeply about Labour's future, than one who has Richard Burgon by his side.
"What do we want?"
"An effective opposition".
"When do we want it?"
"Now".
As they almost said on the picket lines.
The fact remains that we have a government about to enter the most complicated and, possibly, important negotiations since WW II.
There are a range of options.
It is not obvious (except to those with frankly bizarre levels of certainty on this board) what the best options are for the UK in the short, medium or long term. The views the government come to on these questions should be tested, challenged, debated and refined. It is all very well to insist on Parliament playing a bigger role but HM's Loyal Opposition is not playing for all practical purposes. This is not in the national interest. It isn't even in Labour's interests, if that matters at all.
In 18 months most of these decisions will have been made and any new leader will have the devil's own job persuading a substantial number of people that Labour are relevant and what they think might be of interest.
I don't have to like the moral disaster and you don't have to get so upset that your cherished dream might turn out to be a shitshow.
I am upset that we keep rehashing the same arguments around in circles without actually making any progress. There are two groups of people standing opposite each other with their fingers in their ears yelling at the tops of their voices. It doesnt matter if one side or the other comes up with a new bit of evidence, their opponents just brush it off as fake news, and carry on yelling, its futile.
Scott Adams explains this perfectly - he didn't vote for anyone re POTUS
"I have been saying since Trump’s election that the world has split into two realities – or as I prefer to say, two movies on one screen – and most of us don’t realize it. We’re all looking at the same events and interpreting them wildly differently. That’s how cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias work. They work together to create a spontaneous hallucination that gets reinforced over time. That hallucination becomes your reality until something changes.
This phenomenon has nothing to do with natural intelligence. We like to think that the people on the other side of the political debate are dumb, under-informed, or just plain evil. That’s not the case. We’re actually experiencing different realities. I mean that literally.
I know, I know. When you read something like that, you probably shake your head and think I’m either being new-agey or speaking metaphorically. I am being neither. This is well-understood cognitive science.
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
I don't think productivity is a major issue in the high-wage, fast-growth industries that tend to attract the world class talent.
youre just confusing high wages with "talent"
these fast growth industries appear to be having no discernable effect on our economy or else we would be growing above our long term growth trend
and were not
We are in London, where the world class talent tends to be concentrated.
It's a major policy conundrum, that I admit. London has to remain as attractive as it is now, but how do you do that while making it harder to settle in the UK overall and at the same time raising economic activity and levels of productivity?
If we're playing the subsample game then the Tories are now further ahead with the C2DEs than they are with the ABC1s.
That ought to be the most frightening stat of all for Labour. (and only mildly worrying for the Tories, and not for the reason I think you imply).
If voting intention is disassociating from social class then that's likely to produce bigger pro-Con swings in historically Labour seats: precisely where the Tories need it.
The risk is that at some point the tables will turn and that it'd then be the Tories who find themselves with chocolate firewalls.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
Who and on what timescale?
In the long term, the "throw the doors wide open" fix was rejected back on June 23rd as you may recall. If we have a shortage of highly skilled people, and I would in part suggest that we are doing a lousy job of putting the right people in the right careers, then we need to educate and train them. That's the real fix, not the Ponzi scheme of endless immigration.
We did not vote to end immigration on 23rd June.
We voted to take back control - so UK voters can in future decide what level of immigration from the EU they want.
We didn't vote to take back control. We voted to leave the EU.
Indeed we did. Then in accordance with our system of government we placed that in the hands of our elected government to enact, if we dont like how they enact it we throw them out and elect someone else. The current government appears to be going for a take back control approach, if you dont like how that works out I am sure one of Messrs Corbyn, Farron or Prof Nuttall KCMG DSO(Bar) would welcome your vote in 2020.
Yes I see that they are going for that approach. My point was that they could have taken any approach, and Brexit can still mean anything. The trouble is that many people, a large number of whom seem to populate PB, have no idea what taking back control actually means.
And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO.
I am going to take my own advice. I am going to let the government do the job we elected them for, and if I don't like it, I will vote for someone else. In passing possibly you could point to any of the laws that NATO has imposed on the UK ?
I agree. I would rather wait 18 months and get it right than go again this year and get it wrong. yet again. A pre-requisite for the next Labour leader is to ensure that the best talent in the PLP is on the opposition front bench. I know you don't think there is much (just as I struggle to see where it is on the government side), but I think that a leader who can call on the likes of Cooper, Jarvis, Umuna, Kendall, Leslie, Nandy, Starmer, Benn, Ashworth, Kinnock and even Ed Miliband to be in his/her shadow team is going to be in a better position to oppose Mrs May and her cabinet, and to start thinking more deeply about Labour's future, than one who has Richard Burgon by his side.
"What do we want?"
"An effective opposition".
"When do we want it?"
"Now".
As they almost said on the picket lines.
The fact remains that we have a government about to enter the most complicated and, possibly, important negotiations since WW II.
There are a range of options.
It is not obvious (except to those with frankly bizarre levels of certainty on this board) what the best options are for the UK in the short, medium or long term. The views the government come to on these questions should be tested, challenged, debated and refined. It is all very well to insist on Parliament playing a bigger role but HM's Loyal Opposition is not playing for all practical purposes. This is not in the national interest. It isn't even in Labour's interests, if that matters at all.
In 18 months most of these decisions will have been made and any new leader will have the devil's own job persuading a substantial number of people that Labour are relevant and what they think might be of interest.
I could not agree more. But we are where we are. I might wish it otherwise, of course; but a fat lot of good that does. That said, I suspect that we are not going to see much serious Brexit negotiating until the German and French elections are all out of the way.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
Yes, the streets of Hartlepool are thronging with the type of under-utilised geniuses that these companies need. They just need weaning off Subutex first.
I don't have to like the moral disaster and you don't have to get so upset that your cherished dream might turn out to be a shitshow.
I am upset that we keep rehashing the same arguments around in circles without actually making any progress. There are two groups of people standing opposite each other with their fingers in their ears yelling at the tops of their voices. It doesnt matter if one side or the other comes up with a new bit of evidence, their opponents just brush it off as fake news, and carry on yelling, its futile.
That is why I no longer bother. I certain that Brexit will be an unmitigated disaster but when I say it I just get people yelling at me, so I will just get on with preparing for the disaster to come. Brexit has turned me into a "prepper" of sorts
Mrs C, when the Jews were rebelling against the Romans, they also sent lawyers to Rome to protest and litigate when the Romans contravened any of the laws that governed Judea.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
Plus the Jews were split into two rival factions, The People's Front of Judea and The Judean People's Front.
I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
I agree that we don't want to make recruitment a bigger pain in the arse, but I still come back to my point that do we really need a relatively high level of immigration (as we currently have), or is it because it's easier than fixing the fundamental problems with education etc.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
Who and on what timescale?
In the long term, the "throw the doors wide open" fix was rejected back on June 23rd as you may recall. If we have a shortage of highly skilled people, and I would in part suggest that we are doing a lousy job of putting the right people in the right careers, then we need to educate and train them. That's the real fix, not the Ponzi scheme of endless immigration.
We did not vote to end immigration on 23rd June.
We voted to take back control - so UK voters can in future decide what level of immigration from the EU they want.
We didn't vote to take back control. We voted to leave the EU.
Indeed we did. Then in accordance with our system of government we placed that in the hands of our elected government to enact, if we dont like how they enact it we throw them out and elect someone else. The current government appears to be going for a take back control approach, if you dont like how that works out I am sure one of Messrs Corbyn, Farron or Prof Nuttall KCMG DSO(Bar) would welcome your vote in 2020.
Yes I see that they are going for that approach. My point was that they could have taken any approach, and Brexit can still mean anything. The trouble is that many people, a large number of whom seem to populate PB, have no idea what taking back control actually means.
And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO.
I am going to take my own advice. I am going to let the government do the job we elected them for, and if I don't like it, I will vote for someone else. In passing possibly you could point to any of the laws that NATO has imposed on the UK ?
Mrs C, when the Jews were rebelling against the Romans, they also sent lawyers to Rome to protest and litigate when the Romans contravened any of the laws that governed Judea.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
You must also read A Long Way to Shiloh by Lionel Davidson - possibly the best and funniest thriller ever written.
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
I don't think productivity is a major issue in the high-wage, fast-growth industries that tend to attract the world class talent.
youre just confusing high wages with "talent"
these fast growth industries appear to be having no discernable effect on our economy or else we would be growing above our long term growth trend
and were not
We are in London, where the world class talent tends to be concentrated.
It's a major policy conundrum, that I admit. London has to remain as attractive as it is now, but how do you do that while making it harder to settle in the UK overall and at the same time raising economic activity and levels of productivity?
you are in what is affectionately known as the London bullshit economy where people blag and talk themselves up.
the paying fdor "talent" has not resulted in superior economic performance simply pay and asset inflation.
FTSE CEO pay has increased substantially as we have recruited from around the world. FTSE share prices have hardly budged. This relentless chase for talent has produced few tangible benefits bar for the recipeints of the salaries and their recruitment agents.
If you are competing with the world you need the best in the world. These are not coffee shop or lorry driving jobs, but highly-skilled positions in critically important, high tax revenue sectors. Of course, we need better training and better rates of productivity - and are issues that have dogged the UK for decades - but we only compound challenges if we become less attractive to the kind of people, local and foreign, who pay high taxes and build businesses.
If you have essentially unlimited skilled migration, as we currently have with the EU at least, there's little incentive to fix the persistent problems. Economically it might even be the most efficient thing to do, but don't expect people who are losing out or perceive themselves to be losing out to support it.
If tighter immigration rules reduces immigration, and lets face it we will likely still blow past the 100k per year aspirational target, and that forces us to address the problems we have that might be a good thing.
I'm not anti-immigration, far from it, but I'm highly skeptical of claims that we need loose immigration rules because we aren't producing enough home-grown talent. My hunch is that we aren't trying hard enough in the first place.
We need the right immigration rules. That may well mean tighter controls at the lower end (though with high employment rates that is going to be tricky), but at the top end we are competing globally and so need to bring in the best. I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
Think this is the article you meant. EU people not wanting to come makes sense and is probably inevitable until whatever new system is developed is put in place. But the linkedin study also says increasing numbers of UK people looking abroad... That surprised me and could also be a big part of a brexit brain drain.
Mrs C, when the Jews were rebelling against the Romans, they also sent lawyers to Rome to protest and litigate when the Romans contravened any of the laws that governed Judea.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
You must also read A Long Way to Shiloh by Lionel Davidson - possibly the best and funniest thriller ever written.
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
I don't think productivity is a major issue in the high-wage, fast-growth industries that tend to attract the world class talent.
youre just confusing high wages with "talent"
these fast growth industries appear to be having no discernable effect on our economy or else we would be growing above our long term growth trend
and were not
We are in London, where the world class talent tends to be concentrated.
It's a major policy conundrum, that I admit. London has to remain as attractive as it is now, but how do you do that while making it harder to settle in the UK overall and at the same time raising economic activity and levels of productivity?
you are in what is affectionately known as the London bullshit economy where people blag and talk themselves up.
the paying fdor "talent" has not resulted in superior economic performance simply pay and asset inflation.
FTSE CEO pay has increased substantially as we have recruited from around the world. FTSE share prices have hardly budged. This relentless chase for talent has produced few tangible benefits bar for the recipeints of the salaries and their recruitment agents.
The companies I am interested in do not feature on the FTSE. Most are not public.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
Yes, the streets of Hartlepool are thronging with the type of under-utilised geniuses that these companies need. They just need weaning off Subutex first.
Some of those people might not be able to get roles at the top, but they might move up the ladder into better jobs vacated by the people who can.
I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
How ever does Silicon Valley manage ?
Silicon Valley manages by screaming at Washington to increase H1B quotas. They have been doing it for years. When Trump did his "7 countries ban" Silicon Valley soon responded.
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
I don't think productivity is a major issue in the high-wage, fast-growth industries that tend to attract the world class talent.
youre just confusing high wages with "talent"
these fast growth industries appear to be having no discernable effect on our economy or else we would be growing above our long term growth trend
and were not
We are in London, where the world class talent tends to be concentrated.
It's a major policy conundrum, that I admit. London has to remain as attractive as it is now, but how do you do that while making it harder to settle in the UK overall and at the same time raising economic activity and levels of productivity?
you are in what is affectionately known as the London bullshit economy where people blag and talk themselves up.
the paying fdor "talent" has not resulted in superior economic performance simply pay and asset inflation.
FTSE CEO pay has increased substantially as we have recruited from around the world. FTSE share prices have hardly budged. This relentless chase for talent has produced few tangible benefits bar for the recipeints of the salaries and their recruitment agents.
The companies I am interested in do not feature on the FTSE. Most are not public.
the companies you are interested in will never make it to the FTSE as their CEO will blag his propsects and then sell up.
There is not one tiny aspect of those YouGov figures that is anything other than utterly appalling for Labour.
Do you think Copeland could go blue ?
I mean I don't think it is the 1-2 shot that it does that the rest of Betfair does.
But it may well be a classic 'Labour ought to be 1-7, in reality they are more like 5-6, Betfair reckons they're 2-1' with the rest of the market for the Tories.
If the Conservatives take Copeland at a by-election, it will be an outstanding result for them. Your last line looks right to me, mind.
I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
How ever does Silicon Valley manage ?
Silicon Valley companies are desperate for immigration reform and terrified of what Trump might do on that front.
FTSE CEO pay has increased substantially as we have recruited from around the world. FTSE share prices have hardly budged. This relentless chase for talent has produced few tangible benefits bar for the recipeints of the salaries and their recruitment agents.
Totally money down the drain in those particular cases.
Mrs C, when the Jews were rebelling against the Romans, they also sent lawyers to Rome to protest and litigate when the Romans contravened any of the laws that governed Judea.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
You must also read A Long Way to Shiloh by Lionel Davidson - possibly the best and funniest thriller ever written.
Davidson is a fantastic writer, somewhat under appreciated though there seem to be periodic attempts to 'rediscover' him.
He does good McGuffins, but my favourite is Making Good Again which is genuinely weird and thrilling without having anything concrete to pin the weirdness on.
"And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO."
What sovereignty has been ceded to NATO, please?
Our right to decide whether, when and where we defend a fellow NATO member state from military attack.
No so.
With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.
Labour cannot begin solving any of its more deep-seated problems until Jeremy Corbyn goes. So, for now, he is Labour's problem. And he is one that will take another 18 months or so to solve, unless the unions get involved.
Whilst that's true, it's also true that a botched, divisive change of leader, especially one which catapults a novice into the top position and which does not address the strategic issues, won't help. In fact it would probably make things worse.
I agree. I would rather wait 18 months and get it right than go again this year and get it wrong. yet again. A pre-requisite for the next Labour leader is to ensure that the best talent in the PLP is on the opposition front bench. I know you don't think there is much (just as I struggle to see where it is on the government side), but I think that a leader who can call on the likes of Cooper, Jarvis, Umuna, Kendall, Leslie, Nandy, Starmer, Benn, Ashworth, Kinnock and even Ed Miliband to be in his/her shadow team is going to be in a better position to oppose Mrs May and her cabinet, and to start thinking more deeply about Labour's future, than one who has Richard Burgon by his side.
In all fairness, Richard was saying last night that he DOES think Labour have plenty of talent – they just choose to ignore it in favour of nitwits. Which is a fair point.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
"And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO."
What sovereignty has been ceded to NATO, please?
Our right to decide whether, when and where we defend a fellow NATO member state from military attack.
Nope, it does not. Please do read article 5 of the NATO treaty. Membership of NATO obliges us to take such action as WE think necessary in the event of an armed attack on another member state and to raise the matter at the UN security council.
The level of debate on PB - Brexit has caused a drop in Linked-in clicks by right handed Slovakian people of 8.4925% in the last 17 weeks - NO IT HASN'T YOU COCKWOMBAT - is making the site virtually unreadable. And that's setting aside my own repulsive bombast and vainglory.
I may have to quit PB, finally and forever. I recently signed off Twitter for a month and wrote half a book in the interim.
[memo to willimglenn: if and when I do quit PB, I will be back, temporarily, to collect my £1000 when we Brexit in 2019]
I don't have to like the moral disaster and you don't have to get so upset that your cherished dream might turn out to be a shitshow.
I am upset that we keep rehashing the same arguments around in circles without actually making any progress. There are two groups of people standing opposite each other with their fingers in their ears yelling at the tops of their voices. It doesnt matter if one side or the other comes up with a new bit of evidence, their opponents just brush it off as fake news, and carry on yelling, its futile.
It's ironic you posted that after I had come up with a new piece of evidence that you'd just brushed off and carried on yelling.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
With record employment levels in the UK, where do you think these people are going to be found?
Progress normally happens when we find a way for one person to do a job previously done by 2. Or 3 people to do a job previously done by 4. Rising costs force investment into productivity gains. You don't get improved productivity by going for ever cheaper employment.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
People grow into things. The problem with the leadership problem at the moment is everyone is looking for a "quick fix". Corbyn's desperate unpopularity is causing that.
The Tories had this problem after 1997 - do we have 13 years to wait for Labour to recover, I wonder.
I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
How ever does Silicon Valley manage ?
Silicon Valley manages by screaming at Washington to increase H1B quotas. They have been doing it for years. When Trump did his "7 countries ban" Silicon Valley soon responded.
Indeed. But despite the crappiness of the H1B system, which even when it works is pretty slow, Silicon Valley is preeminent in technology. If they can do it with H1B we can do it with Tier 1(Exceptional Skills) or Tier 2 (General) visas.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
With record employment levels in the UK, where do you think these people are going to be found?
Progress normally happens when we find a way for one person to do a job previously done by 2. Or 3 people to do a job previously done by 4. Rising costs force investment into productivity gains. You don't get improved productivity by going for ever cheaper employment.
Most of the jobs my graduate friends get are fifty or more times oversubscribed. A 12% fall is not cause for much concern. It's also a shaky way to assess what people want to do - I remember the polls suggesting that 60% of people want to emigrate!
"And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO."
What sovereignty has been ceded to NATO, please?
Our right to decide whether, when and where we defend a fellow NATO member state from military attack.
No so.
With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.
Well, because we have sovereignty, (remember we always did have it, just that it didn't feel like we did to you), we could and can do what we wanted. Same with the EU same with NATO. That's how international obligations go. We can duck out but the fact is we are in an organisation that demands we respond with "any form of assistance". It does not say, it's fine, if you don't fancy it then you don't need to; It obliges us to do something, as @HurstLlama very kindly points out.
If that is not a ceding of sovereignty then goodness knows what is.
The level of debate on PB - Brexit has caused a drop in Linked-in clicks by right handed Slovakian people of 8.4925% in the last 17 weeks - NO IT HASN'T YOU COCKWOMBAT - is making the site virtually unreadable. And that's setting aside my own repulsive bombast and vainglory.
I may have to quit PB, finally and forever. I recently signed off Twitter for a month and wrote half a book in the interim.
[memo to willimglenn: if and when I do quit PB, I will be back, temporarily, to collect my £1000 when we Brexit in 2019]
"And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO."
What sovereignty has been ceded to NATO, please?
Our right to decide whether, when and where we defend a fellow NATO member state from military attack.
Nope, it does not. Please do read article 5 of the NATO treaty. Membership of NATO obliges us to take such action as WE think necessary in the event of an armed attack on another member state and to raise the matter at the UN security council.
I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
How ever does Silicon Valley manage ?
Silicon Valley manages by screaming at Washington to increase H1B quotas. They have been doing it for years. When Trump did his "7 countries ban" Silicon Valley soon responded.
Christ on a bike. Back to the same old remoaning again. Pie was correct in his video last night liberals in this country really dont like this democracy business. I really cant be bothered with another round of arguments we have rehearsed a thousand times before. The people voted to leave the EU, and we are. Get over it.
Why is saying that it is important we continue to attract world class talent to the UK - and it is worrying that we may already be less attractive than we were - remoaning? Is it not possible to accept that we are leaving the EU, while also pointing out that there are downsides which have to be managed?
if we've attracted so much world class talent, how come the economy hasnt seen an leap in productivity for a decade or so.
I don't think productivity is a major issue in the high-wage, fast-growth industries that tend to attract the world class talent.
youre just confusing high wages with "talent"
these fast growth industries appear to be having no discernable effect on our economy or else we would be growing above our long term growth trend
and were not
We are in London, where the world class talent tends to be concentrated.
It's a major policy conundrum, that I admit. London has to remain as attractive as it is now, but how do you do that while making it harder to settle in the UK overall and at the same time raising economic activity and levels of productivity?
you are in what is affectionately known as the London bullshit economy where people blag and talk themselves up.
the paying fdor "talent" has not resulted in superior economic performance simply pay and asset inflation.
FTSE CEO pay has increased substantially as we have recruited from around the world. FTSE share prices have hardly budged. This relentless chase for talent has produced few tangible benefits bar for the recipeints of the salaries and their recruitment agents.
The companies I am interested in do not feature on the FTSE. Most are not public.
the companies you are interested in will never make it to the FTSE as their CEO will blag his propsects and then sell up.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
People grow into things. The problem with the leadership problem at the moment is everyone is looking for a "quick fix". Corbyn's desperate unpopularity is causing that.
The Tories had this problem after 1997 - do we have 13 years to wait for Labour to recover, I wonder.
Very few people ever have the credentials to be an effective party leader, even fewer to be PM. In the real world, there is not a single Labour MP who ticks either box.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries. Her twitterfeed is one of the best, and no one can accuse her of being an elitist metropolitan. She is a great example of the diversity of the politics of the WWC, much more so than the increasingly ludicrous Nuttall.
Alex Wickham Gareth Snell said a "speccy blonde girl" was "f***ing annoying" and asked her "why don't you piss off". Charmer... https://t.co/wnk6lyguIM
Snell also ranted about "sour faced squabbling ladies", called another woman "bitchy", mocked a lady for taking up "two seats" on a bus
The level of debate on PB - Brexit has caused a drop in Linked-in clicks by right handed Slovakian people of 8.4925% in the last 17 weeks - NO IT HASN'T YOU COCKWOMBAT - is making the site virtually unreadable. And that's setting aside my own repulsive bombast and vainglory.
I may have to quit PB, finally and forever. I recently signed off Twitter for a month and wrote half a book in the interim.
[memo to willimglenn: if and when I do quit PB, I will be back, temporarily, to collect my £1000 when we Brexit in 2019]
Missing a zero?
WG and I mutually agreed to reduce it to £1000 (as we announced on here), partly because we didn't want so much money tied up for two years and also (on my part) because I felt he was betting with his heart not his head, and I was unfairly exploiting someone who was emotionally over-invested in the outcome.
Legal Brexit (with or without transition arrangements) looks, to me, almost certain now, by the end of 2019 (which was our wager).
I emphasise there was no cowardly backtracking by Mr Glenn. He was quite content to keep the bet at £10,000 - but he was also happy to reduce it.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
Yes, the streets of Hartlepool are thronging with the type of under-utilised geniuses that these companies need. They just need weaning off Subutex first.
I've no idea whether there are such people in Hartlepool or in many other places in this country.
But I would not be so quick to dismiss the possibility that there might be such people nor so quick to dismiss the idea that we should try and create the opportunities for people in all parts of our country to develop into the sort of geniuses we have to import from places in countries in the rest of the world that are probably nowhere near as nice as Hartlepool or Barrow or Doncaster or many other parts of this country.
Being open to the world does not have to mean that we have to be mean-spirited about our own country or the people in it. Though, sadly, too often the two do appear to go together.
I wish it were not so. That seems to me to be as much of a "moral disaster" as the xenophobic attitudes Mr Meeks rightly lambasts.
If you are competing with the world you need the best in the world. These are not coffee shop or lorry driving jobs, but highly-skilled positions in critically important, high tax revenue sectors. Of course, we need better training and better rates of productivity - and are issues that have dogged the UK for decades - but we only compound challenges if we become less attractive to the kind of people, local and foreign, who pay high taxes and build businesses.
If you have essentially unlimited skilled migration, as we currently have with the EU at least, there's little incentive to fix the persistent problems. Economically it might even be the most efficient thing to do, but don't expect people who are losing out or perceive themselves to be losing out to support it.
If tighter immigration rules reduces immigration, and lets face it we will likely still blow past the 100k per year aspirational target, and that forces us to address the problems we have that might be a good thing.
I'm not anti-immigration, far from it, but I'm highly skeptical of claims that we need loose immigration rules because we aren't producing enough home-grown talent. My hunch is that we aren't trying hard enough in the first place.
We your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
Think this is the article you meant. EU people not wanting to come makes sense and is probably inevitable until whatever new system is developed is put in place. But the linkedin study also says increasing numbers of UK people looking abroad... That surprised me and could also be a big part of a brexit brain drain.
It has happened before, so can definitely happen again. We need to make sure that the brightest Brits continue to believe that the UK is the best place for them to base themselves - and a large part of that will be to ensure that they continue to get to work with and to have access to the world's top talent. Having the right visa rules is obviously going to be a part of that, but the mood music is vital, too. "You can come here" is much less alluring than "We want you here", for example.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries. Her twitterfeed is one of the best, and no one can accuse her of being an elitist metropolitan. She is a great example of the diversity of the politics of the WWC, much more so than the increasingly ludicrous Nuttall.
"Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries."
The level of debate on PB - Brexit has caused a drop in Linked-in clicks by right handed Slovakian people of 8.4925% in the last 17 weeks - NO IT HASN'T YOU COCKWOMBAT - is making the site virtually unreadable. And that's setting aside my own repulsive bombast and vainglory.
I may have to quit PB, finally and forever. I recently signed off Twitter for a month and wrote half a book in the interim.
[memo to willimglenn: if and when I do quit PB, I will be back, temporarily, to collect my £1000 when we Brexit in 2019]
Missing a zero?
WG and I mutually agreed to reduce it to £1000 (as we announced on here), partly because we didn't want so much money tied up for two years and also (on my part) because I felt he was betting with his heart not his head, and I was unfairly exploiting someone who was emotionally over-invested in the outcome.
Legal Brexit (with or without transition arrangements) looks, to me, almost certain now, by the end of 2019 (which was our wager).
I emphasise there was no cowardly backtracking by Mr Glenn. He was quite content to keep the bet at £10,000 - but he was also happy to reduce it.
Ah okay. I missed the reduction. I also thought the bet was June or July 2019 so clearly I didn't read it carefully enough.
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
London voted very strongly to remain though !
Crazy idea but hear me out, maybe we could educate and train people in the UK to fill these "vital" jobs in London?
Yes, the streets of Hartlepool are thronging with the type of under-utilised geniuses that these companies need. They just need weaning off Subutex first.
I've no idea whether there are such people in Hartlepool or in many other places in this country.
But I would not be so quick to dismiss the possibility that there might be such people nor so quick to dismiss the idea that we should try and create the opportunities for people in all parts of our country to develop into the sort of geniuses we have to import from places in countries in the rest of the world that are probably nowhere near as nice as Hartlepool or Barrow or Doncaster or many other parts of this country.
Being open to the world does not have to mean that we have to be mean-spirited about our own country or the people in it. Though, sadly, too often the two do appear to go together.
I wish it were not so. That seems to me to be as much of a "moral disaster" as the xenophobic attitudes Mr Meeks rightly lambasts.
The most talented people in Hartlepool are already very likely to be heading south. The real challenge is persuading them not to.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries. Her twitterfeed is one of the best, and no one can accuse her of being an elitist metropolitan. She is a great example of the diversity of the politics of the WWC, much more so than the increasingly ludicrous Nuttall.
"Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries."
PMSFL.
She's a gobshite - nothing much more. Her notoriety is based on telling Abbot to eff off. Entertaining, but no leader.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
People grow into things. The problem with the leadership problem at the moment is everyone is looking for a "quick fix". Corbyn's desperate unpopularity is causing that.
The Tories had this problem after 1997 - do we have 13 years to wait for Labour to recover, I wonder.
David Cameron became an MP in 2001...So it is most likely we will see the next Labour Leader enter Parliament in 2020 - at the earliest..
I wish I had a link to the piece written by the CEO of an IT start-up on here early last year - it was absolutely spot on: if you are a fast-growth business looking to secure your next round of funding you don't have time to wait, you need the best people yesterday. You get them and your business grows, so creating opportunities in other areas such as customer and IT support, HR, sales and marketing etc, which can benefit locals. You don't and your business dies or you move it elsewhere - and an opportunity for the UK is lost.
How ever does Silicon Valley manage ?
Silicon Valley manages by screaming at Washington to increase H1B quotas. They have been doing it for years. When Trump did his "7 countries ban" Silicon Valley soon responded.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries. Her twitterfeed is one of the best, and no one can accuse her of being an elitist metropolitan. She is a great example of the diversity of the politics of the WWC, much more so than the increasingly ludicrous Nuttall.
Seems that Trump appears to have forgotten that he is supposed to be serving the entire country, not just the States who voted for him.
"The source is quoted as saying:
“The President has no incentive in helping the state of California. The state harbors more illegal immigrants than any other state and has multiple sanctuary cities that violate federal laws. The state very publicly supported Hillary Clinton throughout the election and the President views the state as being responsible for his loss in the popular vote, something he has had trouble with accepting. They have also recently threatened to leave the Union through their #CalExit campaign, and the President sees this as an opportunity to let them deal with the consequences of their exit. There is a sickness within the liberals in this country that they are not willing to address. Until they understand what ails them can they hope to find the cure. This is a step in the right direction in finding the #CureForWellness. “
Unsurprising: if you radiate an image that you don't like certain people, they are far more likely to look for other options.
Yes, that's worrying. I was briefly heartened after the Brexit vote when Boris appeared and proclaimed that this didn't mean we'd be hauling up the drawbridge to become inward-looking xenophobes. But then came Trump and the British Right's zeal to copy his every move like adoring children. Perhaps we'll just have to accept that the dream of British internationalism is dead.
Trump's election seems to have had as big an effect on the critical analysis faculties of many on the left-of-centre in Britain as in the US.
Can you name a single British policy that's been affected by his election? To clarify, I mean a policy that wasn't in place before November that's subsequently been introduced and which mirrors Trump's, or which has been modified to match, or which has been scrapped.
I see no evidence whatsoever of a 'love-in' and it's simply wishful thinking to believe that there is one.
The left love to show 'public opinion' via street protests/twitter storms/luvvy speeches at awards ceremonies/ etc, etc. Meanwhile the voters tick the blue box,.
Being open to the world does not have to mean that we have to be mean-spirited about our own country or the people in it. Though, sadly, too often the two do appear to go together.
Well said.
Immigration would be a much easier sell if we first of all did a better job of helping our own citizens to achieve as much as they can. Sadly some businesses, politicians, and others seem to have all but given up trying to do that, and have adopted an almost immigration first approach. There's an implicit corollary to the "free immigration for high-fliers" that Brits aren't good enough. That rejection goes down very badly, particularly in places that feel already hard done by relative to places like London.
If Angela Rayner, Becky Bailey and Jess Phillips are classed as Labour's 'rising stars', then they are in even worse trouble than I originally thought.
Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries. Her twitterfeed is one of the best, and no one can accuse her of being an elitist metropolitan. She is a great example of the diversity of the politics of the WWC, much more so than the increasingly ludicrous Nuttall.
"Jess Phillips is a star. The interview linked to in the header is a classic. I don't see her as leader (yet) but she should be front and centre putting the boot into the reactionaries."
PMSFL.
She's a gobshite - nothing much more. Her notoriety is based on telling Abbot to eff off. Entertaining, but no leader.
Far better is Leicester Liz - centrists like myself who are not fans of Farron would consider Labour as an option if she had a realistic chance of becoming leader.
Alex Wickham Gareth Snell said a "speccy blonde girl" was "f***ing annoying" and asked her "why don't you piss off". Charmer... https://t.co/wnk6lyguIM
Snell also ranted about "sour faced squabbling ladies", called another woman "bitchy", mocked a lady for taking up "two seats" on a bus
Sounds like Trump, or is such abuse only OK when coming from the alt.right?
Seems that Trump appears to have forgotten that he is supposed to be serving the entire country, not just the States who voted for him.
"The source is quoted as saying:
“The President has no incentive in helping the state of California. The state harbors more illegal immigrants than any other state and has multiple sanctuary cities that violate federal laws. The state very publicly supported Hillary Clinton throughout the election and the President views the state as being responsible for his loss in the popular vote, something he has had trouble with accepting. They have also recently threatened to leave the Union through their #CalExit campaign, and the President sees this as an opportunity to let them deal with the consequences of their exit. There is a sickness within the liberals in this country that they are not willing to address. Until they understand what ails them can they hope to find the cure. This is a step in the right direction in finding the #CureForWellness. “
Maybe true - but smells like fake news. Nothing on LA Times/ NY Times websites about this and I'm pretty sure they would be screaming if it were true.
The more I look closely at every media outlets bias - the more sceptical and disbelieving I become - it's all agendas - not 'news' if there's a tiny chance that a political axe angle can be ground.
Seems that Trump appears to have forgotten that he is supposed to be serving the entire country, not just the States who voted for him.
"The source is quoted as saying:
“The President has no incentive in helping the state of California. The state harbors more illegal immigrants than any other state and has multiple sanctuary cities that violate federal laws. The state very publicly supported Hillary Clinton throughout the election and the President views the state as being responsible for his loss in the popular vote, something he has had trouble with accepting. They have also recently threatened to leave the Union through their #CalExit campaign, and the President sees this as an opportunity to let them deal with the consequences of their exit. There is a sickness within the liberals in this country that they are not willing to address. Until they understand what ails them can they hope to find the cure. This is a step in the right direction in finding the #CureForWellness. “
Maybe true - but smells like fake news. Nothing on LA Times/ NY Times websites about this and I'm pretty sure they would be screaming if it were true.
The more I look closely at every media outlets bias - the more sceptical and disbelieving I become - it's all agendas - not 'news' if there's a tiny chance that a political axe angle can be ground.
Butte County (the one most affected) actually voted for Trump in the election.
Comments
Money also goes a lot further that way, but it gets reported very little.
His main government job was as Secretary of State for International Development where his principal task was overseeing the reconstruction of Iraq after the Gulf war. Does anyone think that went well? Anyone at all? After that he was SoS for the Environment dealing with bovine tuberculosis. Not a startling success either.
He seems a nice man, genial like his father and it may be that the Labour party needs a bit of tea and sympathy to try and patch itself together after the shambles of the last 2 years. But an alternative PM? You're having a laugh.
If tighter immigration rules reduces immigration, and lets face it we will likely still blow past the 100k per year aspirational target, and that forces us to address the problems we have that might be a good thing.
I'm not anti-immigration, far from it, but I'm highly skeptical of claims that we need loose immigration rules because we aren't producing enough home-grown talent. My hunch is that we aren't trying hard enough in the first place.
And please do let me know when you will be marching to take back control of the sovereignty we have ceded to NATO.
The Romans, by contrast, tried to always attack Jewish rebels on the Sabbath, because the rebels couldn't work out if they were allowed to fight or not on that day
[Got Josephus' The Jewish War to read fairly soon].
"The source is quoted as saying:
“The President has no incentive in helping the state of California. The state harbors more illegal immigrants than any other state and has multiple sanctuary cities that violate federal laws. The state very publicly supported Hillary Clinton throughout the election and the President views the state as being responsible for his loss in the popular vote, something he has had trouble with accepting. They have also recently threatened to leave the Union through their #CalExit campaign, and the President sees this as an opportunity to let them deal with the consequences of their exit. There is a sickness within the liberals in this country that they are not willing to address. Until they understand what ails them can they hope to find the cure. This is a step in the right direction in finding the #CureForWellness. “
http://sacramentodispatch.com/trump-denies-ca-plea-for-federal-funds-cites-sanctuary-cities/
these fast growth industries appear to be having no discernable effect on our economy or else we would be growing above our long term growth trend
and were not
by Lionel Davidson - possibly the best and funniest thriller ever written.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01GQSTMPS/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
"An effective opposition".
"When do we want it?"
"Now".
As they almost said on the picket lines.
The fact remains that we have a government about to enter the most complicated and, possibly, important negotiations since WW II.
There are a range of options.
It is not obvious (except to those with frankly bizarre levels of certainty on this board) what the best options are for the UK in the short, medium or long term. The views the government come to on these questions should be tested, challenged, debated and refined. It is all very well to insist on Parliament playing a bigger role but HM's Loyal Opposition is not playing for all practical purposes. This is not in the national interest. It isn't even in Labour's interests, if that matters at all.
In 18 months most of these decisions will have been made and any new leader will have the devil's own job persuading a substantial number of people that Labour are relevant and what they think might be of interest.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/157149611381/good-example-of-our-two-movie-reality
"I have been saying since Trump’s election that the world has split into two realities – or as I prefer to say, two movies on one screen – and most of us don’t realize it. We’re all looking at the same events and interpreting them wildly differently. That’s how cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias work. They work together to create a spontaneous hallucination that gets reinforced over time. That hallucination becomes your reality until something changes.
This phenomenon has nothing to do with natural intelligence. We like to think that the people on the other side of the political debate are dumb, under-informed, or just plain evil. That’s not the case. We’re actually experiencing different realities. I mean that literally.
I know, I know. When you read something like that, you probably shake your head and think I’m either being new-agey or speaking metaphorically. I am being neither. This is well-understood cognitive science.
And here comes the fun part...
'Evidence based policy'
When do we want it ?
'After an appropriate trial period'
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05795/SN05795.pdf
It's a major policy conundrum, that I admit. London has to remain as attractive as it is now, but how do you do that while making it harder to settle in the UK overall and at the same time raising economic activity and levels of productivity?
If voting intention is disassociating from social class then that's likely to produce bigger pro-Con swings in historically Labour seats: precisely where the Tories need it.
The risk is that at some point the tables will turn and that it'd then be the Tories who find themselves with chocolate firewalls.
What sovereignty has been ceded to NATO, please?
Thanks for recommending it
the paying fdor "talent" has not resulted in superior economic performance simply pay and asset inflation.
FTSE CEO pay has increased substantially as we have recruited from around the world. FTSE share prices have hardly budged. This relentless chase for talent has produced few tangible benefits bar for the recipeints of the salaries and their recruitment agents.
Think this is the article you meant.
EU people not wanting to come makes sense and is probably inevitable until whatever new system is developed is put in place. But the linkedin study also says increasing numbers of UK people looking abroad... That surprised me and could also be a big part of a brexit brain drain.
http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/28/14426550/silicon-valley-trump-immigration-response
He does good McGuffins, but my favourite is Making Good Again which is genuinely weird and thrilling without having anything concrete to pin the weirdness on.
With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.
Lab support among C2DEs in this poll (20%) is slightly below UKIP's (23%) and its own among ABC1s (26%) https://t.co/VyR08wTpXP
We could find ourselves with UK forces engaged in a war we're opposed to.
Breach of article V needs unanimous support with regard to response in the NAC before NATO military forces would be committed.
The Tories had this problem after 1997 - do we have 13 years to wait for Labour to recover, I wonder.
Hilary Benn
Stella Creasy
Nicky Morgan
Chuka Umunna
PBers must try harder!
If that is not a ceding of sovereignty then goodness knows what is.
Edit: my bold within your comment.
LOL
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/brexit-liberal-democrats-election-campaign-pledge-return-uk-eu-1567519
Alex Wickham
Gareth Snell said a "speccy blonde girl" was "f***ing annoying" and asked her "why don't you piss off". Charmer... https://t.co/wnk6lyguIM
Snell also ranted about "sour faced squabbling ladies", called another woman "bitchy", mocked a lady for taking up "two seats" on a bus
But I would not be so quick to dismiss the possibility that there might be such people nor so quick to dismiss the idea that we should try and create the opportunities for people in all parts of our country to develop into the sort of geniuses we have to import from places in countries in the rest of the world that are probably nowhere near as nice as Hartlepool or Barrow or Doncaster or many other parts of this country.
Being open to the world does not have to mean that we have to be mean-spirited about our own country or the people in it. Though, sadly, too often the two do appear to go together.
I wish it were not so. That seems to me to be as much of a "moral disaster" as the xenophobic attitudes Mr Meeks rightly lambasts.
https://twitter.com/FreeCaledonia/status/831105413823266816
PMSFL.
http://www.ipbc.com/2017
Immigration would be a much easier sell if we first of all did a better job of helping our own citizens to achieve as much as they can. Sadly some businesses, politicians, and others seem to have all but given up trying to do that, and have adopted an almost immigration first approach. There's an implicit corollary to the "free immigration for high-fliers" that Brits aren't good enough. That rejection goes down very badly, particularly in places that feel already hard done by relative to places like London.
https://order-order.com/2017/02/13/paul-mason-ukip-voters-are-bike-nicking-toe-rags/
https://youtu.be/wynB55mPpsQ
NEW THREAD