Makes sense to me. Even though I doubt many want the job Hunt has, he is currently the longest serving Cabinet member in post, when people have been out for his head seemingly the entire time - he's a survivor and outside chance at a winner, clearly.
Seems like some sensible words on Austerity from Cameron today - I miss him, he should have stuck around a little longer.
A Guardian/ICM poll suggests that almost 30% of people thinks austerity contributed to so many people dying at Grenfell Tower.
The actual poll stated -This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
So honest reporting would be 72% do not think austerity contributed
But this is the Guardian
I think that gives you an estimate for the population of moonbats in the population.
It's perfectly possible for 'austerity' to have contributed to either the disaster happening, or have led to more deaths that would otherwise have been the case.
Or not. We wont know until a decent report is completed. If the news is anything to go by, we may not get one.
The problem comes when people ignore what will be an immensely complex case, possibly with a whole load of causal factors, and just screech 'austerity!'. They are not interested in the truth, or preventing future deaths. They're only interested in making sick political capital out of the deaths.
One of the favourite parts of the election is the fact that Clegg - hero of extreme remainers holds no elected office whereas their nemesis Farage still does. I wonder if the hardened Europhiles will go quiet on twitter when this unelected mouthpiece of minority of voters turns up on Question Time every few weeks?
Why does Farage still hold elected office? His job is done, it couldn't be the salary and expenses could it?
The job isn't done, as continuity Remain are more than happy to point out when it suits their case.
A Guardian/ICM poll suggests that almost 30% of people thinks austerity contributed to so many people dying at Grenfell Tower.
The actual poll stated -This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
So honest reporting would be 72% do not think austerity contributed
But this is the Guardian
I think that gives you an estimate for the population of moonbats in the population.
It's perfectly possible for 'austerity' to have contributed to either the disaster happening, or have led to more deaths that would otherwise have been the case.
Or not. We wont know until a decent report is completed. If the news is anything to go by, we may not get one.
The problem comes when people ignore what will be an immensely complex case, possibly with a whole load of causal factors, and just screech 'austerity!'. They are not interested in the truth, or preventing future deaths. They're only interested in making sick political capital out of the deaths.
I am not intrinsically opposed to people making political capital out of tragic events, as sometimes there is reasonable political capital that should be made and people can use tragedy to avoid talking about those things, but I think 'people will ignore immensely complex case with a lot of factors to make political capital out of it' is about as apt as you can get in terms of the majority of instances of people attempt to make points of tragedy.
A Guardian/ICM poll suggests that almost 30% of people thinks austerity contributed to so many people dying at Grenfell Tower.
The actual poll stated -This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
So honest reporting would be 72% do not think austerity contributed
But this is the Guardian
I have said it so many times but if no money had been invested in Grenfell Towers then no one would have died and the fire would have just stayed in the one flat.
Isn't the issue that it wasn't so much 'investment' as a cosmetic makeover?
Presumably the inquiry will get to the bottom of this.
As far as I understand it the works were designed as an eco upgrade to reduce carbon footprint.
One of the favourite parts of the election is the fact that Clegg - hero of extreme remainers holds no elected office whereas their nemesis Farage still does. I wonder if the hardened Europhiles will go quiet on twitter when this unelected mouthpiece of minority of voters turns up on Question Time every few weeks?
Why does Farage still hold elected office? His job is done, it couldn't be the salary and expenses could it?
The job isn't done, as continuity Remain are more than happy to point out when it suits their case.
And he can still draw the salary and expenses.
As can every MEP of any party, Leaver or Remainer.
A Guardian/ICM poll suggests that almost 30% of people thinks austerity contributed to so many people dying at Grenfell Tower.
The actual poll stated -This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
So honest reporting would be 72% do not think austerity contributed
But this is the Guardian
It does show how poorly the government are doing on comms. They have let this lie establish. New Labour under Bad Al would have been all over any sort of suggestion and squashed it within a day.
I bet loads of people think that due to cuts the flats were renovated on the super cheap, and have no idea that £100k+ per flat was spent.
A Guardian/ICM poll suggests that almost 30% of people thinks austerity contributed to so many people dying at Grenfell Tower.
The actual poll stated -This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
So honest reporting would be 72% do not think austerity contributed
But this is the Guardian
I think that gives you an estimate for the population of moonbats in the population.
It's perfectly possible for 'austerity' to have contributed to either the disaster happening, or have led to more deaths that would otherwise have been the case.
Or not. We wont know until a decent report is completed. If the news is anything to go by, we may not get one.
The problem comes when people ignore what will be an immensely complex case, possibly with a whole load of causal factors, and just screech 'austerity!'. They are not interested in the truth, or preventing future deaths. They're only interested in making sick political capital out of the deaths.
Was it plain stupidity to use flammable cladding on a tall structure so placed to augment air convection? Was it to save money? Was it a class-based decision? Certainly---I think---the higher socio-economic classes are better at getting heard by the decision makers.
On a slower, but deadly front, the same questions may be applied to things like the decision to encourage the use of diesel engine propelled vehicles.
Government should have technical experts with input and review at every turn.
It does show how poorly the government are doing on comms. They have let this lie establish. New Labour under Bad Al would have been all over any sort of suggestion and squashed it within a day.
I bet loads of people think that due to cuts the flats were renovated on the super cheap, and have no idea that £100k+ per flat was spent.
Actually I thought that poll was rather encouraging. Only 28% of respondents took a kneejerk anti-Tory view.
According to Wikipedia, just 4 years ago the controversial UKIP leadership candidate Anne Marie Walters was shortlisted to be Labour's candidate in Brighton Pavilion:
"The Labour Party is due to pick its parliamentary candidate for the Brighton Pavilion seat currently held by Green MP Caroline Lucas. Two women have been shortlisted for the selection contest tomorrow (Saturday 20 July). One of them, Anne Marie Waters, is an outspoken campaigner against Sharia law – the moral and religious code for Muslims, according to the Brighton and Hove Independent."
A Guardian/ICM poll suggests that almost 30% of people thinks austerity contributed to so many people dying at Grenfell Tower.
The actual poll stated -This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
So honest reporting would be 72% do not think austerity contributed
But this is the Guardian
I think that gives you an estimate for the population of moonbats in the population.
It's perfectly possible for 'austerity' to have contributed to either the disaster happening, or have led to more deaths that would otherwise have been the case.
Or not. We wont know until a decent report is completed. If the news is anything to go by, we may not get one.
The problem comes when people ignore what will be an immensely complex case, possibly with a whole load of causal factors, and just screech 'austerity!'. They are not interested in the truth, or preventing future deaths. They're only interested in making sick political capital out of the deaths.
I don't think the people screeching even realise what they are doing. I think they have genuinely worked themselves up into such an angry state that they only listen to news and interpretations that fit into their pre-existing narrative. The rise of social media has become an awful thing for civil political debate. It's made even worse when it's platforms like Twitter and Reddit, where the simplistic outrage messages are most likely to induce your confirmation-based endorphins and cause you to amplify the message.
I wish people could just stop being so angry and just talk to those with different opinions.
Now, I voted to remain but people saying Cummings has U-turned on his Brexit position either have the intellectual capability of a gnat, or are appealing to those that do so.
In many universes driving home for me this evening would have been better avoided with the future car crash I'll have. But that will have no bearing on whether or not I choose to do so. If we THINK about what Cummings is saying, he is also pointing out that remaining will have been an error in some future universes. I fear the point is lost on his critics though, his blog and twitter feed are exceptional in their intelligence I find.
Is Cummings really invoking the Multiverse to say that whatever we do there will be some alternative universe where that would have been a bad or a good idea. It might be an idea to live in the real universe and the real world. In this one I suspect that we would have been better off without his £350million/week to the NHS promise.
No he's not.
Basically he's saying if the government messed up negotiations then leaving the EU may have been a mistake, but if they do it well then it's an opportunity.
According to Wikipedia, just 4 years ago the controversial UKIP leadership candidate Anne Marie Walters was shortlisted to be Labour's candidate in Brighton Pavilion:
"The Labour Party is due to pick its parliamentary candidate for the Brighton Pavilion seat currently held by Green MP Caroline Lucas. Two women have been shortlisted for the selection contest tomorrow (Saturday 20 July). One of them, Anne Marie Waters, is an outspoken campaigner against Sharia law – the moral and religious code for Muslims, according to the Brighton and Hove Independent."
Now, I voted to remain but people saying Cummings has U-turned on his Brexit position either have the intellectual capability of a gnat, or are appealing to those that do so.
In many universes driving home for me this evening would have been better avoided with the future car crash I'll have. But that will have no bearing on whether or not I choose to do so. If we THINK about what Cummings is saying, he is also pointing out that remaining will have been an error in some future universes. I fear the point is lost on his critics though, his blog and twitter feed are exceptional in their intelligence I find.
Is Cummings really invoking the Multiverse to say that whatever we do there will be some alternative universe where that would have been a bad or a good idea. It might be an idea to live in the real universe and the real world. In this one I suspect that we would have been better off without his £350million/week to the NHS promise.
No he's not.
Basically he's saying if the government messed up negotiations then leaving the EU may have been a mistake, but if they do it well then it's an opportunity.
Pretty non controversial I'd have thought
But more controversial than if this had been made clear before the referendum, no?
...I suspect he views the whole thing in the same way Ike viewed D-Day. It was the right thing to do and was planned as best it could be but if it turned out to be another Dieppe then as the man in charge he was prepared to take the blame even if the causes of failure were not his directly....
Hmm, the difference is that Brexit was an entirely voluntary act, whereas in 1944 the Allies weren't really in a position to shrug their shoulders and say 'Maybe we won't bother given the risks'.
Not exactly true. They were pushed into it by the Russian demand for a second front. They could just as easily have gone with the continued attacks in Italy and the invasion of Southern France.
IANAE, but wasn't it much more complicated than that? The US wanted the main invasion in northern Europe (much easier logistics), whilst we Brits wanted it in the Mediterranean. The US were always going to win that argument.
A major factor in the Italian campaign was demands that something be done - the Russians wanted pressure to be put on the Germans, whilst the US wanted their troops doing something during 1943.
On my understanding the aim of the Italian campaign was to tie down German troops, taking pressure off the Soviets and potentially an invasion across the Channel. The Allies made such heavy weather of Italy that the opposite happened. Small numbers of Germans kept much larger numbers of Allied troops occupied. The Allies were in better shape by this point, so it didn't make any difference overall, but the campaign failed in its original aim.
In hindsight, Italy was always only going to have two strips by which any progress could be made, separated by quite rugged terrain. A few choke points held things up for weeks/months.
Saw in - World at War, I think, that the US commander was controlling something like 20 nationalities, all with their own quirks and rules, which did not help matters.
Friend of mine lost a leg at Anzio. The landing went well but then the initiative stalled and Kesselring was able to regroup and surround the allied troops. My friends withering comment was that if German Commanders had shown the same level of incompetence as their allied counterparts did in Southern Italy, they would have been shot.
Unless the context has been misinterpreted, he needs to really cut these kinds of statements out. Some are already comparing him to a Monarch, and if he is seen to have 'contempt' for the 95% this just paves the way for Melenchon in five years time. This after his 'complex thoughts' statement as well.
I'm still waiting with keen anticipation for the many Leavers who assured us all that negotiations with the EU would be plain sailing to admit that those negotiations are proving rather harder than they had expected.
According to Wikipedia, just 4 years ago the controversial UKIP leadership candidate Anne Marie Walters was shortlisted to be Labour's candidate in Brighton Pavilion:
"The Labour Party is due to pick its parliamentary candidate for the Brighton Pavilion seat currently held by Green MP Caroline Lucas. Two women have been shortlisted for the selection contest tomorrow (Saturday 20 July). One of them, Anne Marie Waters, is an outspoken campaigner against Sharia law – the moral and religious code for Muslims, according to the Brighton and Hove Independent."
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I'm still waiting with keen anticipation for the many Leavers who assured us all that negotiations with the EU would be plain sailing to admit that those negotiations are proving rather harder than they had expected.
No worries, sunshine, will let you know if it does.
I'm still waiting with keen anticipation for the many Leavers who assured us all that negotiations with the EU would be plain sailing to admit that those negotiations are proving rather harder than they had expected.
What makes you think that? Seems that things are going reasonably well to me. We are still at the macho point in the negotiations where everyone is trying to show how hard they are. Given that it seems quite low key so far.
The Sun President clearly setting out the direction for his imperial presidency. I hope the stand at Bastille Day can accomodate both his and Trump's egos?
"This was a terrible accident, and it is wrong to suggest decisions taken by politicians were a factor: 26%
This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
This was a terrible event and policy decisions contributed to so many people dying, but Conservative and Labour governments are both at fault: 33%
Don’t know: 14%"
Nuttiest questions I have ever seen in a supposedly non-voodoo poll. Nutty answers too, given that the only rationally possible one is "How the feck should I know, why do you think there's an enquiry?"
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
Hunt is a reasonably effective cabinet minister but not a leader, especially if the Tories want to move from a hung parliament to any sort of majority next time. If the Tories want to make inroads with the young and London it can only be Boris but only after the Brexit negotiations have been completed. I think we are heading for a continuation of the May premiership until then, with she Hammond and Davis doing the deal
"This was a terrible accident, and it is wrong to suggest decisions taken by politicians were a factor: 26%
This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
This was a terrible event and policy decisions contributed to so many people dying, but Conservative and Labour governments are both at fault: 33%
Don’t know: 14%"
Nuttiest questions I have ever seen in a supposedly non-voodoo poll. Nutty answers too, given that the only rationally possible one is "How the feck should I know, why do you think there's an enquiry?"
Those push answers are terrible.
It is akin to when did x stop beating his wife...
a) He hasn't b) He does it far less than he used to c) He isn't a bad bloke, I am sure he will stop in the future d) Does he beat his wife?
Those 28% are most likely already voting Labour and make up most of the party's base.
Seems an assumption by you with no facts as yet to back it up.
I'd have thought it was obvious I was assuming. That's why I said 'most likely.'
Why is it most likely ? The make up of the 28% could be a very varied group.
Perhaps, but I doubt it.
Re why I said most likely, well if you're anti-austerity for a start it's very unlikely you are going to vote Conservative. The Conservatives have been pro-austerity for years and Labour set out their stall as the anti-austerity party years and years ago. Those who I've seen blame the Grenfell Tragedy partly at the very least on austerity have often tended to be people who have been anti-austerity from the get-go. Thus, my statement on why it's most likely to be those who already vote Labour who make up that 28%.
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I genuinely struggle to understand how anyone could believe politicians like Jeremy Hunt or George Osborne could appeal to a broader segment of the British electorate than Theresa May.
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I genuinely struggle to understand how anyone could believe politicians like Jeremy Hunt or George Osborne could appeal to a broader segment of the British electorate than Theresa May.
I think people are thinking Cameroon = success. Trouble is even Cameron didn't come across as remote or cold as Osborne and Hunt do.
Been muttering about Jeremy Hunt for a while. Those are really tremendous odds.
Nearest thing to a Cameroon in the cabinet, good on the media, tough enough to face down the junior doctors, what's not to like?
He is about as popular as a British entry in the Eurovision Song contest....
So well ahead of the field then? Seriously, he is a poor mans Cameron but compared to the opposition he looks good to me.
I can't see Hunt beating Corbyn, the left despise him as much as Gove and Osborne, the ex Kippers who voted for May are not keen on him either and he has not got Cameron's charisma. He is fine as a Cabinet Minister but is not the man to beat Corbyn, I am coming round to the view that Boris with his charisma and new end austerity stance may be that man, otherwise you may as well keep May. In any case Boris has made clear he does not want the leadership until Brexit is done and dusted
I'm still waiting with keen anticipation for the many Leavers who assured us all that negotiations with the EU would be plain sailing to admit that those negotiations are proving rather harder than they had expected.
What makes you think that? Seems that things are going reasonably well to me. We are still at the macho point in the negotiations where everyone is trying to show how hard they are. Given that it seems quite low key so far.
We don't have a coherent negotiating position, well understood objectives, anything remotely resembling a plan or a clearly identifiable negotiating team.. We do have a fractious and dysfunctional government whose members argue with each other in the FT letters page.
Unless the context has been misinterpreted, he needs to really cut these kinds of statements out. Some are already comparing him to a Monarch, and if he is seen to have 'contempt' for the 95% this just paves the way for Melenchon in five years time. This after his 'complex thoughts' statement as well.
Macron has made a poor start generally. He 's lost four ministers, and gives the impression of overweening arrogance..
Unless the context has been misinterpreted, he needs to really cut these kinds of statements out. Some are already comparing him to a Monarch, and if he is seen to have 'contempt' for the 95% this just paves the way for Melenchon in five years time. This after his 'complex thoughts' statement as well.
Macron has made a poor start generally. He 's lost four ministers, and gives the impression of overweening arrogance..
And he invited trump for a visit..Here in Britain that is a hanging offence.
Been muttering about Jeremy Hunt for a while. Those are really tremendous odds.
Nearest thing to a Cameroon in the cabinet, good on the media, tough enough to face down the junior doctors, what's not to like?
He is about as popular as a British entry in the Eurovision Song contest....
So well ahead of the field then? Seriously, he is a poor mans Cameron but compared to the opposition he looks good to me.
I can't see Hunt beating Corbyn, the left despise him as much as Gove and Osborne, the ex Kippers who voted for May are not keen on him either and he has not got Cameron's charisma. He is fine as a Cabinet Minister but is not the man to beat Corbyn, I am coming round to the view that Boris with his charisma and new end austerity stance may be that man, otherwise you may as well keep May. In any case Boris has made clear he does not want the leadership until Brexit is done and dusted
Boris beat lefty Ken twice to win Labour-leaning London in 2012 and -16
Unless the context has been misinterpreted, he needs to really cut these kinds of statements out. Some are already comparing him to a Monarch, and if he is seen to have 'contempt' for the 95% this just paves the way for Melenchon in five years time. This after his 'complex thoughts' statement as well.
Macron has made a poor start generally. He 's lost four ministers, and gives the impression of overweening arrogance..
I thought the complex thoughts comment was just a bit weird and brushed it off initially, same with the Jupiterian comment but the 'those who are nothing comment' really is bad and in the context of the previous statements makes him look arrogant, I'm sad to say.
Still, he needs to find a way to snap out of this and succeed because the alternatives (Le Pen, Melenchon) are worse.
Unless the context has been misinterpreted, he needs to really cut these kinds of statements out. Some are already comparing him to a Monarch, and if he is seen to have 'contempt' for the 95% this just paves the way for Melenchon in five years time. This after his 'complex thoughts' statement as well.
I'm still waiting with keen anticipation for the many Leavers who assured us all that negotiations with the EU would be plain sailing to admit that those negotiations are proving rather harder than they had expected.
Not a leaver - but don't think we can say with any confidence how it's going. It's too early.
What we do know is TM wisely delayed A50 to buy more time, and then unwisely called an election.
Clearly the Daniel Hannan, it will only take ten minutes for the EU to give us all we want, nonsense was nonsense. But I think a transitional deal is fairly likely?
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I genuinely struggle to understand how anyone could believe politicians like Jeremy Hunt or George Osborne could appeal to a broader segment of the British electorate than Theresa May.
I agree. They should keep May for now. The critical thing is that any large increases in public spending are matched by tax increases. Toires can then keep the badge of relative fiscal reponsibility against Corbyn. I also think that the steam will be taken out of the spending brigade by an honest tax policy where all income tax bands are increased. It will in fact then be easy to destroy the McDonell fantasy economics from a position of "we are balanced pragmatists".
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I genuinely struggle to understand how anyone could believe politicians like Jeremy Hunt or George Osborne could appeal to a broader segment of the British electorate than Theresa May.
I agree. They should keep May for now. The critical thing is that any large increases in public spending are matched by tax increases. Toires can then keep the badge of relative fiscal reponsibility against Corbyn. I also think that the steam will be taken out of the spending brigade by an honest tax policy where all income tax bands are increased. It will in fact then be easy to destroy the McDonell fantasy economics from a position of "we are balanced pragmatists".
Can't tell if that's sarcasm or not! I think if May proposed increasing all income tax bands she would have a challenger from her party within a week.
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I genuinely struggle to understand how anyone could believe politicians like Jeremy Hunt or George Osborne could appeal to a broader segment of the British electorate than Theresa May.
I agree. They should keep May for now. The critical thing is that any large increases in public spending are matched by tax increases. Toires can then keep the badge of relative fiscal reponsibility against Corbyn. I also think that the steam will be taken out of the spending brigade by an honest tax policy where all income tax bands are increased. It will in fact then be easy to destroy the McDonell fantasy economics from a position of "we are balanced pragmatists".
Now, I voted to remain but people saying Cummings has U-turned on his Brexit position either have the intellectual capability of a gnat, or are appealing to those that do so.
In many universes driving home for me this evening would have been better avoided with the future car crash I'll have. But that will have no bearing on whether or not I choose to do so. If we THINK about what Cummings is saying, he is also pointing out that remaining will have been an error in some future universes. I fear the point is lost on his critics though, his blog and twitter feed are exceptional in their intelligence I find.
Is Cummings really invoking the Multiverse to say that whatever we do there will be some alternative universe where that would have been a bad or a good idea. It might be an idea to live in the real universe and the real world. In this one I suspect that we would have been better off without his £350million/week to the NHS promise.
No he's not.
Basically he's saying if the government messed up negotiations then leaving the EU may have been a mistake, but if they do it well then it's an opportunity.
Pretty non controversial I'd have thought
Every leaver is going to try and dodge accountability by claiming the final deal is not the one they would have negotiated. Cummings is just getting his excuse in early
Unless the context has been misinterpreted, he needs to really cut these kinds of statements out. Some are already comparing him to a Monarch, and if he is seen to have 'contempt' for the 95% this just paves the way for Melenchon in five years time. This after his 'complex thoughts' statement as well.
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I genuinely struggle to understand how anyone could believe politicians like Jeremy Hunt or George Osborne could appeal to a broader segment of the British electorate than Theresa May.
I agree. They should keep May for now. The critical thing is that any large increases in public spending are matched by tax increases. Toires can then keep the badge of relative fiscal reponsibility against Corbyn. I also think that the steam will be taken out of the spending brigade by an honest tax policy where all income tax bands are increased. It will in fact then be easy to destroy the McDonell fantasy economics from a position of "we are balanced pragmatists".
They need to tax wealth & property, not income.
Any radical overhaul of the structure of taxation and benefits (long overdue) needs careful consideration and a majority government. Wealth taxes have lots of problems and unintended consequences as far as I am aware.
There is a dangerous notion abroad that large increases in public expenditure can be easily financed by "hitting the rich". The coalition and present government have actually closed many loopholes and gone after tax havens. Money has come in but it isn't transformative. We live and died by international trade and investment. Corbynite populism would be a monumental spanner in the works and the public finances would collapse along with the economy if they tried to implement their programme.
Making Jeremy Hunt leader of the Conservative Party would be a mistake. I can't see him attracting the under 40s the Tories need to get on side, and nor can I see him making any kind of ground in London either. Hunt isn't particularly likeable and often comes across as quite cold/remote just like TMay did. He's not got the human touch.
I genuinely struggle to understand how anyone could believe politicians like Jeremy Hunt or George Osborne could appeal to a broader segment of the British electorate than Theresa May.
I agree. They should keep May for now. The critical thing is that any large increases in public spending are matched by tax increases. Toires can then keep the badge of relative fiscal reponsibility against Corbyn. I also think that the steam will be taken out of the spending brigade by an honest tax policy where all income tax bands are increased. It will in fact then be easy to destroy the McDonell fantasy economics from a position of "we are balanced pragmatists".
Can't tell if that's sarcasm or not! I think if May proposed increasing all income tax bands she would have a challenger from her party within a week.
Nope, not James Callaghan is not one of the Labour leaders with the first name James.
The list is
Keir Hardie, Ramsay MacDonald, Harold Wilson, and Gordon Brown.
So, why have Labour leaders been so ashamed of the name James?
It is not a case of being ashamed but simply that they were never called by the name 'James' as infants. Many people make the mistake of assuming that when a person is referred to by a second or third name that he/she has made a decision not to be known by their first name. That is usually not the case in that parents never intended that he/she be known by the first name.Thus, Wilson's parents had had no wish for him to be called 'James'. In Callaghan's case the position was different. Apparently his real name was 'Leonard' - and he decided to drop that in favour of 'Jim' or 'James' for political career reasons. I believe that within his family he continued to be known as 'Len'.
Comments
Seems like some sensible words on Austerity from Cameron today - I miss him, he should have stuck around a little longer.
Or not. We wont know until a decent report is completed. If the news is anything to go by, we may not get one.
The problem comes when people ignore what will be an immensely complex case, possibly with a whole load of causal factors, and just screech 'austerity!'. They are not interested in the truth, or preventing future deaths. They're only interested in making sick political capital out of the deaths.
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/882024855364935680
Can't wait to see Corbynistas support Melenchon in five years time and Trumpers/alt-right support FN again.
This is the interview it was from btw: https://www.challenges.fr/election-presidentielle-2017/interview-exclusive-d-emmanuel-macron-je-ne-crois-pas-au-president-normal_432886
Like Lib Dem MEPs for example.
Sorry, MEP.
I bet loads of people think that due to cuts the flats were renovated on the super cheap, and have no idea that £100k+ per flat was spent.
On a slower, but deadly front, the same questions may be applied to things like the decision to encourage the use of diesel engine propelled vehicles.
Government should have technical experts with input and review at every turn.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Marie_Waters
"The Labour Party is due to pick its parliamentary candidate for the Brighton Pavilion seat currently held by Green MP Caroline Lucas.
Two women have been shortlisted for the selection contest tomorrow (Saturday 20 July).
One of them, Anne Marie Waters, is an outspoken campaigner against Sharia law – the moral and religious code for Muslims, according to the Brighton and Hove Independent."
http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2013/07/19/labour-poised-to-choose-parliamentary-candidate-for-brighton-pavilion/22599/
How on earth did she get on the Labour shortlist in Brighton of all places?
I wish people could just stop being so angry and just talk to those with different opinions.
Basically he's saying if the government messed up negotiations then leaving the EU may have been a mistake, but if they do it well then it's an opportunity.
Pretty non controversial I'd have thought
Unless the context has been misinterpreted, he needs to really cut these kinds of statements out. Some are already comparing him to a Monarch, and if he is seen to have 'contempt' for the 95% this just paves the way for Melenchon in five years time. This after his 'complex thoughts' statement as well.
Nearest thing to a Cameroon in the cabinet, good on the media, tough enough to face down the junior doctors, what's not to like?
Corbyn is a twerp
He's half barmy
So's his army
Whistle while you work
"This was a terrible accident, and it is wrong to suggest decisions taken by politicians were a factor: 26%
This was a terrible event, but the austerity policies pursued over the last seven years contributed to so many people dying: 28%
This was a terrible event and policy decisions contributed to so many people dying, but Conservative and Labour governments are both at fault: 33%
Don’t know: 14%"
Nuttiest questions I have ever seen in a supposedly non-voodoo poll. Nutty answers too, given that the only rationally possible one is "How the feck should I know, why do you think there's an enquiry?"
It is akin to when did x stop beating his wife...
a) He hasn't
b) He does it far less than he used to
c) He isn't a bad bloke, I am sure he will stop in the future
d) Does he beat his wife?
Re why I said most likely, well if you're anti-austerity for a start it's very unlikely you are going to vote Conservative. The Conservatives have been pro-austerity for years and Labour set out their stall as the anti-austerity party years and years ago. Those who I've seen blame the Grenfell Tragedy partly at the very least on austerity have often tended to be people who have been anti-austerity from the get-go. Thus, my statement on why it's most likely to be those who already vote Labour who make up that 28%.
Apart from that, situation perfect.
It's really weird that they'd go off plantation and write something negative.
Still, he needs to find a way to snap out of this and succeed because the alternatives (Le Pen, Melenchon) are worse.
What we do know is TM wisely delayed A50 to buy more time, and then unwisely called an election.
Clearly the Daniel Hannan, it will only take ten minutes for the EU to give us all we want, nonsense was nonsense. But I think a transitional deal is fairly likely?
I think if May proposed increasing all income tax bands she would have a challenger from her party within a week.
Softest of Brexits.
There is a dangerous notion abroad that large increases in public expenditure can be easily financed by "hitting the rich". The coalition and present government have actually closed many loopholes and gone after tax havens. Money has come in but it isn't transformative. We live and died by international trade and investment. Corbynite populism would be a monumental spanner in the works and the public finances would collapse along with the economy if they tried to implement their programme.
NEW THREAD
In Callaghan's case the position was different. Apparently his real name was 'Leonard' - and he decided to drop that in favour of 'Jim' or 'James' for political career reasons. I believe that within his family he continued to be known as 'Len'.