Regardless, I think you're right about a fundamental reassessment of commuting and office properties. This has been a matter of much debate on here recently - my own view is that there will be a spectrum of business responses to the situation, but that full-time office working will only ever return for a minority of businesses and key worker groups. There'll probably be more businesses that dispose of their offices completely and go full WFH than are at the other end of the scale, with those in between going half-and-half, or more-or-less full-time WFH with the hiring of meeting rooms for occasional get togethers.
The net result will, presumably, be that the value of commercial property will tank, and support services like office cleaners, cafes and bars in the commercial districts will go out of business until the remaining number of firms matches the remaining number of clients.
Johnson can, of course, plead with firms and their employees to go back to work and save the urban cores from implosion, but there's nothing he can do to force them to comply.
Apologies for the slight snip but it's a very fair assessment with almost all of which I would concur.
"Key Workers" have always been able to use office desks but, as with their children in schools, the take-up has not been what was anticipated.
I'm talking to clients who are telling me their staff don't want to come back to desks but do want an occasional get-together as you say and are looking to re-configure their office space for networking, socially distanced meetings and the like so taking out the desks in favour of more flexible space. It could well be such space could be then made available on a rental basis to other organisations (not unattractive if you have a freehold interest).
I do think getting the children back to school and the onset of autumn will, perversely, give WFH a boost. It will be easier for many to work in a house with no children - childcare costs (not unsubstantial) will be reduced and no one will have to get up and trudge up to the station or bus stop or get into the car on a cold, wet Monday morning.
Last 3-5 days subject to revision. Last 5 days included for completeness.
Your mileage may vary. May contain nuts. May contain nutters. May contain trained Marxist nutters. All wrongs reserved. No resemblance between this data and anything in the universe is implied, admitted, allowed, submitted or accepted.
Is that another outbreak in Herefordshire or a continuation of the same one ?
I'm sure I've seen reports in the last couple of days of more confirmed cases from that farm outbreak, so I'd imagine it's the same one.
Speaking more broadly, the local authority numbers that @Malmesbury collates are some of the more useful data available at the moment, simply because they show us that (a) the virus appears to have faded away to background levels in most of England and (b) the bulk of the really stubborn remaining hotspots are in local authorities with substantial populations of South Asian descent (so, you're combining the strong suggestion from the hospital and death data that non-white people are more vulnerable to the virus with an atypically high percentage of multi-generational households.) This is useful to the Government and councils alike, because it gives them a good idea of where to look for new infection spikes and where to target interventions to nip them in the bud.
The ward level data shows that 90% of Leicester is at background level too. Hence Mayor Soulsby wanting to end the lockdown and move to a more targeted approach.
It is not purely in the BAME communities though, a significant number of white people too, particularly where whole families live in a typical Leicester 2 up and 2 down.
Ah, so many of the same general issues: largeish households, small houses, dense terraced streets?
I had heard this complaint from the Mayor in the press, too. Hopefully the net effect of yet greater testing availability and the new powers proposed for local authorities will mean that more targeted interventions take place in future, and we won't have more instances of a population as large as that of Leicester being restricted in this way all at once.
Last 3-5 days subject to revision. Last 5 days included for completeness.
Your mileage may vary. May contain nuts. May contain nutters. May contain trained Marxist nutters. All wrongs reserved. No resemblance between this data and anything in the universe is implied, admitted, allowed, submitted or accepted.
Is that another outbreak in Herefordshire or a continuation of the same one ?
I'm sure I've seen reports in the last couple of days of more confirmed cases from that farm outbreak, so I'd imagine it's the same one.
Speaking more broadly, the local authority numbers that @Malmesbury collates are some of the more useful data available at the moment, simply because they show us that (a) the virus appears to have faded away to background levels in most of England and (b) the bulk of the really stubborn remaining hotspots are in local authorities with substantial populations of South Asian descent (so, you're combining the strong suggestion from the hospital and death data that non-white people are more vulnerable to the virus with an atypically high percentage of multi-generational households.) This is useful to the Government and councils alike, because it gives them a good idea of where to look for new infection spikes and where to target interventions to nip them in the bud.
The ward level data shows that 90% of Leicester is at background level too. Hence Mayor Soulsby wanting to end the lockdown and move to a more targeted approach.
It is not purely in the BAME communities though, a significant number of white people too, particularly where whole families live in a typical Leicester 2 up and 2 down.
Looks to me that more than 10% of the wards have a coloured symbol, indicating >5% positivity? Do the new powers that were just devolved allow them to make this change?
No, Soulsby cannot overrule Hancock. We live in a "lick up, kick down" political system, where local mayors can only operate within very tight constraints.
Great piece RB. Labour's utter disconnection from its blue collar roots goes back well before Corbyn and I don't know what they do about it. The values that I get from punters on the doors round here and those held by so many in the party are just not in the same room any more. People are pretty hard line on stuff like law and order, patriotism, community values. And a strong work ethic where giving people a fair return for good honest graft is their focus not UC benefits and the like.
Back in the 2015 election campaign it was clear that the Labour campaign was an emoty shell - plenty to say to the bottom 10% about the top 10%. For the majority in the middle, very little, and don't DARE thinking about aspiration and doing better for your kids than you had. Then Corbyn where they stopped talking to even the bottom 10%.
How about this as a starter for 10. People want to work. Focus on aspiration, on drive, on making a decent living for honest work. Then you can focus on the millions where no matter how hard they work they still can't get by, and on the forgotten tier below who can't work and are treated like they are the small number of feral feckless underclass so beloved by the Daily Mail and certain Tories when setting welfare state policies. Have to frame it all of a simple principle that work is good. I think too many Labour activists have forgotten than the Labour party is the party of labour, as in work.
Thanks for your kind comment.
Your thoughts on the doorstep and aspiration reminded me of the opening section of Gould's 'The Unfinished Revolution' which iirc described exactly that.
New Labour convinced the country that it was the party for everybody, and of opportunity. Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, education, education, education etc.
Tis a pity that Blairite war mongering did in all the good stuff.
I'm not sure there was that much 'good stuff' especially given the fortuitous period Blair was PM in.
Ah, but there was the promise of good stuff, hence the New Labour landslide victories of 1997 and 2001. I agree delivery was lacking in many ways.
Do note though that the Conservatives got elected in 2019 on a similar list of promises, not least that Brexit is the answer to the economic woes of the purple wall. I have no doubt that there will also be a failure of delivery there too.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
Yes, but that wasn't the question that I asked.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That we will have to wait and see.
My own view is that some will be better and some will not.
And there is the issue of relativity as well.
If other places, London especially, struggle then that might affect how other places feel.
Regardless, I think you're right about a fundamental reassessment of commuting and office properties. This has been a matter of much debate on here recently - my own view is that there will be a spectrum of business responses to the situation, but that full-time office working will only ever return for a minority of businesses and key worker groups. There'll probably be more businesses that dispose of their offices completely and go full WFH than are at the other end of the scale, with those in between going half-and-half, or more-or-less full-time WFH with the hiring of meeting rooms for occasional get togethers.
The net result will, presumably, be that the value of commercial property will tank, and support services like office cleaners, cafes and bars in the commercial districts will go out of business until the remaining number of firms matches the remaining number of clients.
Johnson can, of course, plead with firms and their employees to go back to work and save the urban cores from implosion, but there's nothing he can do to force them to comply.
Apologies for the slight snip but it's a very fair assessment with almost all of which I would concur.
"Key Workers" have always been able to use office desks but, as with their children in schools, the take-up has not been what was anticipated.
I'm talking to clients who are telling me their staff don't want to come back to desks but do want an occasional get-together as you say and are looking to re-configure their office space for networking, socially distanced meetings and the like so taking out the desks in favour of more flexible space. It could well be such space could be then made available on a rental basis to other organisations (not unattractive if you have a freehold interest).
I do think getting the children back to school and the onset of autumn will, perversely, give WFH a boost. It will be easier for many to work in a house with no children - childcare costs (not unsubstantial) will be reduced and no one will have to get up and trudge up to the station or bus stop or get into the car on a cold, wet Monday morning.
It is an interesting return for many to the situation of home working typical of pre industrial societies. For the white collar classes at least, as few blue collar jobs are possible at home.
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
As it stands, Huddersfield all but saving themselves from relegation, at the expense of promoting Leeds.
If you're going to comment on football please use the proper name for Leeds United, 'Dirty Leeds'.
I thought you'd had the good grace to amend this to "Don Revie's Dirty Leeds" in acknowledgement of Bielsa's new regime? Anyway, 12 minutes from promotion as I write.......
Congratulations to Marco Biesla's Leeds on their promotion.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Interestingly, this is one area where there is very little difference between the politics of the respondents. It's just age and gender where there are differences - older men tend to be more likely to know the correct answer.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Everyone thinks their twenties was a brilliant time, and that it goes downhill from then.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Everyone thinks their twenties was a brilliant time, and that it goes downhill from then.
Not me. The best time of my life has been the last ten years. No question. From about the age of 45 on its been a wild, wild ride.
Great piece RB. Labour's utter disconnection from its blue collar roots goes back well before Corbyn and I don't know what they do about it. The values that I get from punters on the doors round here and those held by so many in the party are just not in the same room any more. People are pretty hard line on stuff like law and order, patriotism, community values. And a strong work ethic where giving people a fair return for good honest graft is their focus not UC benefits and the like.
Back in the 2015 election campaign it was clear that the Labour campaign was an emoty shell - plenty to say to the bottom 10% about the top 10%. For the majority in the middle, very little, and don't DARE thinking about aspiration and doing better for your kids than you had. Then Corbyn where they stopped talking to even the bottom 10%.
How about this as a starter for 10. People want to work. Focus on aspiration, on drive, on making a decent living for honest work. Then you can focus on the millions where no matter how hard they work they still can't get by, and on the forgotten tier below who can't work and are treated like they are the small number of feral feckless underclass so beloved by the Daily Mail and certain Tories when setting welfare state policies. Have to frame it all of a simple principle that work is good. I think too many Labour activists have forgotten than the Labour party is the party of labour, as in work.
Thanks for your kind comment.
Your thoughts on the doorstep and aspiration reminded me of the opening section of Gould's 'The Unfinished Revolution' which iirc described exactly that.
New Labour convinced the country that it was the party for everybody, and of opportunity. Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, education, education, education etc.
Tis a pity that Blairite war mongering did in all the good stuff.
I'm not sure there was that much 'good stuff' especially given the fortuitous period Blair was PM in.
Ah, but there was the promise of good stuff, hence the New Labour landslide victories of 1997 and 2001. I agree delivery was lacking in many ways.
Do note though that the Conservatives got elected in 2019 on a similar list of promises, not least that Brexit is the answer to the economic woes of the purple wall. I have no doubt that there will also be a failure of delivery there too.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
Yes, but that wasn't the question that I asked.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That we will have to wait and see.
My own view is that some will be better and some will not.
And there is the issue of relativity as well.
If other places, London especially, struggle then that might affect how other places feel.
I think that the larger university cities in Midlands and North will do well, but that the smaller towns and cities of the purple wall will continue their decades of decline. The reasons my parents left Wigan in the late Sixties still apply. Opportunities are better elsewhere.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Everyone thinks their twenties was a brilliant time, and that it goes downhill from then.
Not me. The best time of my life has been the last ten years. No question. From about the age of 45 on its been a wild, wild ride.
Their perspective of the world around them more than their perspective of their own life.
Regardless, I think you're right about a fundamental reassessment of commuting and office properties. This has been a matter of much debate on here recently - my own view is that there will be a spectrum of business responses to the situation, but that full-time office working will only ever return for a minority of businesses and key worker groups. There'll probably be more businesses that dispose of their offices completely and go full WFH than are at the other end of the scale, with those in between going half-and-half, or more-or-less full-time WFH with the hiring of meeting rooms for occasional get togethers.
The net result will, presumably, be that the value of commercial property will tank, and support services like office cleaners, cafes and bars in the commercial districts will go out of business until the remaining number of firms matches the remaining number of clients.
Johnson can, of course, plead with firms and their employees to go back to work and save the urban cores from implosion, but there's nothing he can do to force them to comply.
Apologies for the slight snip but it's a very fair assessment with almost all of which I would concur.
"Key Workers" have always been able to use office desks but, as with their children in schools, the take-up has not been what was anticipated.
I'm talking to clients who are telling me their staff don't want to come back to desks but do want an occasional get-together as you say and are looking to re-configure their office space for networking, socially distanced meetings and the like so taking out the desks in favour of more flexible space. It could well be such space could be then made available on a rental basis to other organisations (not unattractive if you have a freehold interest).
I do think getting the children back to school and the onset of autumn will, perversely, give WFH a boost. It will be easier for many to work in a house with no children - childcare costs (not unsubstantial) will be reduced and no one will have to get up and trudge up to the station or bus stop or get into the car on a cold, wet Monday morning.
It is an interesting return for many to the situation of home working typical of pre industrial societies. For the white collar classes at least, as few blue collar jobs are possible at home.
They are embracing bean bags and ping-pong in the offices.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Everyone thinks their twenties was a brilliant time, and that it goes downhill from then.
the really good era of pop was 60's 70';s.. then you had lots of pop groups who couldn't play a tune or sing in tune.. or sing for that matter.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Everyone thinks their twenties was a brilliant time, and that it goes downhill from then.
the really good era of pop was 60's 70';s.. then you had lots of pop groups who couldn't play a tune or sing in tune.. or sing for that matter.
So that would make you born around 1945-50? Close?
It is an interesting return for many to the situation of home working typical of pre industrial societies. For the white collar classes at least, as few blue collar jobs are possible at home.
Yes, it's a fundamental societal shift and no one has really got to grips with it or thought through the consequences (certainly no sign the Government has).
A century or more of commuting from the suburb to the office in the town is over - technology now enables work and home to be co-located. This notion of "Place" has been about for ages but was predicated on city centre residential living with work and leisure co-located.
Culturally, and you hear it from some on here, the physical dislocation of work and home led to a mental and emotional dislocation and a compartmentalisation of the two. Work is where you work, home is where you live.
As Boris Johnson is a prime example of a homeworker, albeit in Tied Accommodation so like a school caretaker, I'm surprised he has so little sympathy for the new generation of homeworkers.
In property terms, the compartmentalisation can still occur via the "Home Office" which some have had for years. This will continue and develop. Small suburban towns and villages which had become ghost towns in the day for being dormitory commuter towns now have a bright future as the homeworkers go "local" for food, recreation, eating out at lunchtime, socialising and the like.
The cafe with strong WiFi and good food will be a huge success, the Home Office scene will be huge, home deliveries will be popular and we could just see the re-vitalisation of community life as people have time in the evening to get involved so amateur dramatics, clubs and societies could all flourish.
I'm just scratching the surface - this is a real revolution.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Everyone thinks their twenties was a brilliant time, and that it goes downhill from then.
the really good era of pop was 60's 70';s.. then you had lots of pop groups who couldn't play a tune or sing in tune.. or sing for that matter.
My daughter was born in 1987 in the US though we lived in the UK for 7 years and she has always maintained that the 60s and 70s were much better for music than subsequent decades. She still does.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
It is an interesting return for many to the situation of home working typical of pre industrial societies. For the white collar classes at least, as few blue collar jobs are possible at home.
Yes, it's a fundamental societal shift and no one has really got to grips with it or thought through the consequences (certainly no sign the Government has).
A century or more of commuting from the suburb to the office in the town is over - technology now enables work and home to be co-located. This notion of "Place" has been about for ages but was predicated on city centre residential living with work and leisure co-located.
Culturally, and you hear it from some on here, the physical dislocation of work and home led to a mental and emotional dislocation and a compartmentalisation of the two. Work is where you work, home is where you live.
As Boris Johnson is a prime example of a homeworker, albeit in Tied Accommodation so like a school caretaker, I'm surprised he has so little sympathy for the new generation of homeworkers.
In property terms, the compartmentalisation can still occur via the "Home Office" which some have had for years. This will continue and develop. Small suburban towns and villages which had become ghost towns in the day for being dormitory commuter towns now have a bright future as the homeworkers go "local" for food, recreation, eating out at lunchtime, socialising and the like.
The cafe with strong WiFi and good food will be a huge success, the Home Office scene will be huge, home deliveries will be popular and we could just see the re-vitalisation of community life as people have time in the evening to get involved so amateur dramatics, clubs and societies could all flourish.
I'm just scratching the surface - this is a real revolution.
I remember back in the 80s/90s, there was the somewhat unfortunately-termed notion of "telecottaging": as broadband to the home wasn't feasible then, the idea was that people could telecommute from rural locations by working from a local shared office with a high-speed (for the day) connection. I could see that being a product that could become viable again for those that either don't have a viable home office setup or who would like the social aspect of such a set-up.
It is an interesting return for many to the situation of home working typical of pre industrial societies. For the white collar classes at least, as few blue collar jobs are possible at home.
Yes, it's a fundamental societal shift and no one has really got to grips with it or thought through the consequences (certainly no sign the Government has).
A century or more of commuting from the suburb to the office in the town is over - technology now enables work and home to be co-located. This notion of "Place" has been about for ages but was predicated on city centre residential living with work and leisure co-located.
Culturally, and you hear it from some on here, the physical dislocation of work and home led to a mental and emotional dislocation and a compartmentalisation of the two. Work is where you work, home is where you live.
As Boris Johnson is a prime example of a homeworker, albeit in Tied Accommodation so like a school caretaker, I'm surprised he has so little sympathy for the new generation of homeworkers.
In property terms, the compartmentalisation can still occur via the "Home Office" which some have had for years. This will continue and develop. Small suburban towns and villages which had become ghost towns in the day for being dormitory commuter towns now have a bright future as the homeworkers go "local" for food, recreation, eating out at lunchtime, socialising and the like.
The cafe with strong WiFi and good food will be a huge success, the Home Office scene will be huge, home deliveries will be popular and we could just see the re-vitalisation of community life as people have time in the evening to get involved so amateur dramatics, clubs and societies could all flourish.
I'm just scratching the surface - this is a real revolution.
The old city hall of my home town here was remodelled a couple of years ago to a business incubation zone - somewhere you could rent office or meeting space, get your phone answered, and do hot desking. It seems to be working out quite well. Obviously it was done well before covid turned up.
Great piece RB. Labour's utter disconnection from its blue collar roots goes back well before Corbyn and I don't know what they do about it. The values that I get from punters on the doors round here and those held by so many in the party are just not in the same room any more. People are pretty hard line on stuff like law and order, patriotism, community values. And a strong work ethic where giving people a fair return for good honest graft is their focus not UC benefits and the like.
Back in the 2015 election campaign it was clear that the Labour campaign was an emoty shell - plenty to say to the bottom 10% about the top 10%. For the majority in the middle, very little, and don't DARE thinking about aspiration and doing better for your kids than you had. Then Corbyn where they stopped talking to even the bottom 10%.
How about this as a starter for 10. People want to work. Focus on aspiration, on drive, on making a decent living for honest work. Then you can focus on the millions where no matter how hard they work they still can't get by, and on the forgotten tier below who can't work and are treated like they are the small number of feral feckless underclass so beloved by the Daily Mail and certain Tories when setting welfare state policies. Have to frame it all of a simple principle that work is good. I think too many Labour activists have forgotten than the Labour party is the party of labour, as in work.
Thanks for your kind comment.
Your thoughts on the doorstep and aspiration reminded me of the opening section of Gould's 'The Unfinished Revolution' which iirc described exactly that.
New Labour convinced the country that it was the party for everybody, and of opportunity. Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, education, education, education etc.
Tis a pity that Blairite war mongering did in all the good stuff.
I'm not sure there was that much 'good stuff' especially given the fortuitous period Blair was PM in.
Ah, but there was the promise of good stuff, hence the New Labour landslide victories of 1997 and 2001. I agree delivery was lacking in many ways.
Do note though that the Conservatives got elected in 2019 on a similar list of promises, not least that Brexit is the answer to the economic woes of the purple wall. I have no doubt that there will also be a failure of delivery there too.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
Yes, but that wasn't the question that I asked.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That we will have to wait and see.
My own view is that some will be better and some will not.
And there is the issue of relativity as well.
If other places, London especially, struggle then that might affect how other places feel.
I think that the larger university cities in Midlands and North will do well, but that the smaller towns and cities of the purple wall will continue their decades of decline. The reasons my parents left Wigan in the late Sixties still apply. Opportunities are better elsewhere.
???
Universities are going to get HAMMERED, on several fronts. Some will go out of biz
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
The late 80s in particular were very buoyant. Meanwhile, unemployment fell steadily, and house prices went up. Hence: Loadsamoney appearing around 1988
Great piece RB. Labour's utter disconnection from its blue collar roots goes back well before Corbyn and I don't know what they do about it. The values that I get from punters on the doors round here and those held by so many in the party are just not in the same room any more. People are pretty hard line on stuff like law and order, patriotism, community values. And a strong work ethic where giving people a fair return for good honest graft is their focus not UC benefits and the like.
Back in the 2015 election campaign it was clear that the Labour campaign was an emoty shell - plenty to say to the bottom 10% about the top 10%. For the majority in the middle, very little, and don't DARE thinking about aspiration and doing better for your kids than you had. Then Corbyn where they stopped talking to even the bottom 10%.
How about this as a starter for 10. People want to work. Focus on aspiration, on drive, on making a decent living for honest work. Then you can focus on the millions where no matter how hard they work they still can't get by, and on the forgotten tier below who can't work and are treated like they are the small number of feral feckless underclass so beloved by the Daily Mail and certain Tories when setting welfare state policies. Have to frame it all of a simple principle that work is good. I think too many Labour activists have forgotten than the Labour party is the party of labour, as in work.
Thanks for your kind comment.
Your thoughts on the doorstep and aspiration reminded me of the opening section of Gould's 'The Unfinished Revolution' which iirc described exactly that.
New Labour convinced the country that it was the party for everybody, and of opportunity. Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, education, education, education etc.
Tis a pity that Blairite war mongering did in all the good stuff.
I'm not sure there was that much 'good stuff' especially given the fortuitous period Blair was PM in.
Ah, but there was the promise of good stuff, hence the New Labour landslide victories of 1997 and 2001. I agree delivery was lacking in many ways.
Do note though that the Conservatives got elected in 2019 on a similar list of promises, not least that Brexit is the answer to the economic woes of the purple wall. I have no doubt that there will also be a failure of delivery there too.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
Yes, but that wasn't the question that I asked.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That we will have to wait and see.
My own view is that some will be better and some will not.
And there is the issue of relativity as well.
If other places, London especially, struggle then that might affect how other places feel.
I think that the larger university cities in Midlands and North will do well, but that the smaller towns and cities of the purple wall will continue their decades of decline. The reasons my parents left Wigan in the late Sixties still apply. Opportunities are better elsewhere.
That depends on what you're looking for.
Affordable housing, nice countryside and good communications suit many people and that's what you can get outside the cities - Wigan's population is increasing for example.
The places which I think will continue to struggle are the 'one industry' towns too far from the main communication routes.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
It is an interesting return for many to the situation of home working typical of pre industrial societies. For the white collar classes at least, as few blue collar jobs are possible at home.
Yes, it's a fundamental societal shift and no one has really got to grips with it or thought through the consequences (certainly no sign the Government has).
A century or more of commuting from the suburb to the office in the town is over - technology now enables work and home to be co-located. This notion of "Place" has been about for ages but was predicated on city centre residential living with work and leisure co-located.
Culturally, and you hear it from some on here, the physical dislocation of work and home led to a mental and emotional dislocation and a compartmentalisation of the two. Work is where you work, home is where you live.
As Boris Johnson is a prime example of a homeworker, albeit in Tied Accommodation so like a school caretaker, I'm surprised he has so little sympathy for the new generation of homeworkers.
In property terms, the compartmentalisation can still occur via the "Home Office" which some have had for years. This will continue and develop. Small suburban towns and villages which had become ghost towns in the day for being dormitory commuter towns now have a bright future as the homeworkers go "local" for food, recreation, eating out at lunchtime, socialising and the like.
The cafe with strong WiFi and good food will be a huge success, the Home Office scene will be huge, home deliveries will be popular and we could just see the re-vitalisation of community life as people have time in the evening to get involved so amateur dramatics, clubs and societies could all flourish.
I'm just scratching the surface - this is a real revolution.
I remember back in the 80s/90s, there was the somewhat unfortunately-termed notion of "telecottaging": as broadband to the home wasn't feasible then, the idea was that people could telecommute from rural locations by working from a local shared office with a high-speed (for the day) connection. I could see that being a product that could become viable again for those that either don't have a viable home office setup or who would like the social aspect of such a set-up.
Some measure of this - normally a meeting room or two, and a seminar quality main hall, have been a common feature in village / parish hall restorations for some time.
I see no reason why they could not add a couple of office spaces. Or pubs could do it.
Stockholm approaching herd immunity: 40% can be immune to Covid19 according to the Public Health Agency.
Utmärkt Sverige!
What evidence is being offered that 40% of Swedes are immune?
They've had 76k recorded cases in a population of 10m. Even assuming only one in 10 case is identified and recorded, it means at most 7% of population have had CV-19.
That would boradly be in line with the estimates for the UK too.
I remember back in the 80s/90s, there was the somewhat unfortunately-termed notion of "telecottaging": as broadband to the home wasn't feasible then, the idea was that people could telecommute from rural locations by working from a local shared office with a high-speed (for the day) connection. I could see that being a product that could become viable again for those that either don't have a viable home office setup or who would like the social aspect of such a set-up.
Yes, I remember. The technology was very unreliable and the speed so slow as to make the whole exercise impractical. 30 years on and the technology is several orders of magnitude easier and this is the thing.
Homeworking is and has been proved to be possible for a great number of people and while it has required businesses to adapt processes and procedures, those that have have seen productivity unaffected and if anything improved.
There are concerns over the mental health of homeworkers and that's an area which cannot be ignored - the notion of a "community" working space is interesting and as you say provides a valuable social aspect.
The main post is acknowledged, but Labour in turn enjoys unusual support in the middle classes nowadays, too. The problem is specifically that Brexit & to a lesser extent Corbyn motivated hundreds of thousands of never-voters for five years.
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
As it stands, Huddersfield all but saving themselves from relegation, at the expense of promoting Leeds.
If you're going to comment on football please use the proper name for Leeds United, 'Dirty Leeds'.
I thought you'd had the good grace to amend this to "Don Revie's Dirty Leeds" in acknowledgement of Bielsa's new regime? Anyway, 12 minutes from promotion as I write.......
Congratulations to Marco Biesla's Leeds on their promotion.
Stockholm approaching herd immunity: 40% can be immune to Covid19 according to the Public Health Agency.
Utmärkt Sverige!
What evidence is being offered that 40% of Swedes are immune?
They've had 76k recorded cases in a population of 10m. Even assuming only one in 10 case is identified and recorded, it means at most 7% of population have had CV-19.
That would boradly be in line with the estimates for the UK too.
The main post is acknowledged, but Labour in turn enjoys unusual support in the middle classes nowadays, too. The problem is specifically that Brexit & to a lesser extent Corbyn motivated hundreds of thousands of never-voters for five years.
Some carefully timed, race related dog whistles can call some of them back for every foreseeable election.
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
Scared of their own shadow despite a 179 seat majority. Such was the power of the Establishment.
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
Higher paid workers who already have their positions and their reputations and their contacts will love working from home.
Lower paid workers who are younger and who don't have a second bedroom and might even be living in a flatshare and who are left out of meetings and no longer get any mentoring will hate it.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
Higher paid workers who already have their positions and their reputations and their contacts will love working from home.
Lower paid workers who are younger and who don't have a second bedroom and might even be living in a flatshare and who are left out of meetings and no longer get any mentoring will hate it.
That was going to be my next point. Thanks for bringing it up. It doesn't matter to too many people at the moment, but imagine being a 22-year old entering the workforce in now-teleworking Bigco. The pace of learning will be utterly stunted. Ultimately there will be big advantages to high-productivity firms, so I imagine big accountants or other similar mass employers of young people will not be long-term remote working. And, yes, my flatshare colleagues are not able to participate in videoconferences in the same way. But it works well for those of an age to pootle around in their gardens (they usually have gardens).
EDIT: I can't believe I forgot this. If you used to use your house for X hours a week, and now you use it for X + 24 or even X + 40, your willingness to pay must go way up.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
I am baffled as to why separating the UK from the European Union is beneficial to Russia.
What holds Putin in check is not the EU, but NATO. There is no way an independent Britain is going to renege on its commitments there any more than a UK inside the EU would.
This is not about military containment, and I think you're a little naive to think it is. Russia's meddling in the internal democracies of other countries is about three things:
1. Straight financial interest. Russia funds groups that oppose fracking, and supports politicians who have anti-fracking stances. (This was sufficiently successful that they managed to get fracking banned in Poland, which is insane, as Poland has some potentially very productive gas shales). They have also worked to spread disinformation about wind turbines, and their damage to birds and the like. The purpose here is really simple: keep countries dependent on Russian gas.
(This goes further: politicians who support Russian gas projects, and oppose non-Russian ones - like Gerhard Schroeder - end up with lucrative jobs in the Russian energy industry after retirement.)
2. Making countries weaker and more divided. Russia's dream scenario is to be to Europe and the caucuses, what the US is to the Americas. This means they want to have friendly regimes in place, ideally. For near neighbours (like Ukraine), they want to be able to directly interfere if they want. And they want to be able to use military force, without fear of response.
All these things are easier if other countries are weak and disunited. Succession movements, they love. The more (and smaller) other countries are, the more Russia will loom over them.
They therefore support Sinn Fein, and BLM and White Pride, and the Basque Nationalists. Their bots will seek to amplify AC Grayling and Nigel Farage - because a culture war means a disunited country, which neutralises other countries economic strength relative to Russia.
3. The undermining of multilateral organisations. They hate NATO, and have - again - spread disinformation about it (where do you think President Trump got his ideas from?), and support politicians who are hostile to it. But their perfect world is one where 'rules based' goes away, and the law of the jungle, where the (militarily) strong have the influence. They therefore seek to also undermine the WTO and the EU and other groupings, whenever possible.
Is there a word for people who unwittingly support their objectives with high-minded justifications?
I think it was Lenin that invented the term "useful idiots".
In this country we just call them "Jeremy Corbyn".
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
Higher paid workers who already have their positions and their reputations and their contacts will love working from home.
Lower paid workers who are younger and who don't have a second bedroom and might even be living in a flatshare and who are left out of meetings and no longer get any mentoring will hate it.
That was going to be my next point. Thanks for bringing it up. It doesn't matter to too many people at the moment, but imagine being a 22-year old entering the workforce in now-teleworking Bigco. The pace of learning will be utterly stunted. Ultimately there will be big advantages to high-productivity firms, so I imagine big accountants or other similar mass employers of young people will not be long-term remote working. And, yes, my flatshare colleagues are not able to participate in videoconferences in the same way. But it works well for those of an age to pootle around in their gardens (they usually have gardens).
EDIT: I can't believe I forgot this. If you used to use your house for X hours a week, and now you use it for X + 24 or even X + 40, your willingness to pay must go way up.
As a business we are looking at whether we need an office or not and a key consideration is how to train and integrate a new staff member without an office. We are a small business, not recruiting all the time, so could just rent somewhere smaller for shorter time periods specifically when new people join. Recruiting people with more experience is another option, not something we tended to do historically, instead preferring to recruit straight from university.
So I completely agree young people will get shafted (yet again) if a large section of the workforce goes to wfh permanently, which seems inevitable. The question is it going to be a shift of 10% or 30%?
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
I suspect automaton and AI may be a more significant medium term threat to the back office environment than outsourcing of work.
The transport issue is worth discussion - I don't know enough about the economics but I presume the likes of South West Ttains and C2C make their money from commuter travel so it's not been fun for them in the last few weeks.
Even if passenger numbers recover slightly, the viability of a train operating model based on commuter traffic is called into question. I love train travel for leisure and will look forward to it but I suspect the train operators are going to have to make some difficult decisions and we need to ask what kind of public rail system we will need in a non-commuting future.
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
Scared of their own shadow despite a 179 seat majority. Such was the power of the Establishment.
Alternatively they just didnt believe in being as radical as you wanted them to be!
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
It's sad it was so short. By 1990 the E was way down in quality, dodgy dealers were moving in, the raves got edgier and nastier (previously they'd been incredibly peaceful), police clamped down, it all got rather sad rather quick, even the music palled.
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
This a point a lot of people saying how much they love WFH full time have missed. If you can do your job anywhere, someone else in another place in the world can do it too.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
Scared of their own shadow despite a 179 seat majority. Such was the power of the Establishment.
They could have done anything between 1997 and 2005 with those massive majorities. Top of the list: they should have introduced proportional representation in my opinion.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
Everyone thinks their twenties was a brilliant time, and that it goes downhill from then.
the really good era of pop was 60's 70';s.. then you had lots of pop groups who couldn't play a tune or sing in tune.. or sing for that matter.
So that would make you born around 1945-50? Close?
bit later... QE2 was on the throne,... I loathed most of the 80's music. v little was wonderful.. I can't think of anything special right now... I rather stopped listening which is why I am so crap Popmaster! ...after the 80's it got worse with groups like Oasis and Blur both who seemed tone deaf to me..., why anone liked them is beyond me.. I sort of gravitated to Classic FM when it came onstream in the early 90's.
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
Scared of their own shadow despite a 179 seat majority. Such was the power of the Establishment.
They could have done anything between 1997 and 2005 with those massive majorities. Top of the list: they should have introduced proportional representation in my opinion.
After those thumping victories under FPTP? It'd take a lot more stubborn principal than most possess to change the voting system after that.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
There's always been people thrown on the scrapheap and others who have been selfish arseholes.
But the 1980s were good for most people and most places - that everywhere outside of Southern England was one big soup kitchen seems to be a recurring fantasy of middle class leftists.
Ironically one group of places which did struggle in the 1980s were middle class inner urban areas which went significantly downhill with consequences to the Conservative vote in cities.
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
Higher paid workers who already have their positions and their reputations and their contacts will love working from home.
Lower paid workers who are younger and who don't have a second bedroom and might even be living in a flatshare and who are left out of meetings and no longer get any mentoring will hate it.
I think there is something in that. Certainly my experience is the higher ups are not particularly frustrated by lockdown - in fact it can be helpful as their staff and peers cannot just wander up to raise things, which I feel is a psycological barrier, so they have more control over their own time - while the lower downs are anxious and adrift.
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
Scared of their own shadow despite a 179 seat majority. Such was the power of the Establishment.
Alternatively they just didnt believe in being as radical as you wanted them to be!
Some of that yes. But they were frightened. Of the press in particular. And of challenging the Thatcher settlement. Income tax, for example, they were terrified of even hinting it might need to be raised. And "sticking to Tory spending plans" for 2 years - what a sadsack thing that was.
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
Scared of their own shadow despite a 179 seat majority. Such was the power of the Establishment.
They could have done anything between 1997 and 2005 with those massive majorities. Top of the list: they should have introduced proportional representation in my opinion.
After those thumping victories under FPTP? It'd take a lot more stubborn principal than most possess to change the voting system after that.
Although bringing it in post 2005 and they could conceivably have been in power for many more years...
Great piece RB. Labour's utter disconnection from its blue collar roots goes back well before Corbyn and I don't know what they do about it. The values that I get from punters on the doors round here and those held by so many in the party are just not in the same room any more. People are pretty hard line on stuff like law and order, patriotism, community values. And a strong work ethic where giving people a fair return for good honest graft is their focus not UC benefits and the like.
Back in the 2015 election campaign it was clear that the Labour campaign was an emoty shell - plenty to say to the bottom 10% about the top 10%. For the majority in the middle, very little, and don't DARE thinking about aspiration and doing better for your kids than you had. Then Corbyn where they stopped talking to even the bottom 10%.
How about this as a starter for 10. People want to work. Focus on aspiration, on drive, on making a decent living for honest work. Then you can focus on the millions where no matter how hard they work they still can't get by, and on the forgotten tier below who can't work and are treated like they are the small number of feral feckless underclass so beloved by the Daily Mail and certain Tories when setting welfare state policies. Have to frame it all of a simple principle that work is good. I think too many Labour activists have forgotten than the Labour party is the party of labour, as in work.
Thanks for your kind comment.
Your thoughts on the doorstep and aspiration reminded me of the opening section of Gould's 'The Unfinished Revolution' which iirc described exactly that.
New Labour convinced the country that it was the party for everybody, and of opportunity. Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, education, education, education etc.
Tis a pity that Blairite war mongering did in all the good stuff.
I'm not sure there was that much 'good stuff' especially given the fortuitous period Blair was PM in.
Ah, but there was the promise of good stuff, hence the New Labour landslide victories of 1997 and 2001. I agree delivery was lacking in many ways.
Do note though that the Conservatives got elected in 2019 on a similar list of promises, not least that Brexit is the answer to the economic woes of the purple wall. I have no doubt that there will also be a failure of delivery there too.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
Yes, but that wasn't the question that I asked.
Will the state of the towns and people of the purple wall be better for GE 2024? If so, how?
That we will have to wait and see.
My own view is that some will be better and some will not.
And there is the issue of relativity as well.
If other places, London especially, struggle then that might affect how other places feel.
I think that the larger university cities in Midlands and North will do well, but that the smaller towns and cities of the purple wall will continue their decades of decline. The reasons my parents left Wigan in the late Sixties still apply. Opportunities are better elsewhere.
???
Universities are going to get HAMMERED, on several fronts. Some will go out of biz
Yes, but not Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Sheffield etc. University of Lincoln or Bolton etc are much more at risk.
That delivery was lacking makes Blair's government even more culpable given the favourable circumstances it operated in.
I don't think anyone can claim that the period 1997-2007 was harder than from 2008 onwards.
The problem was Blair believed Labour had to be cautious to persuade disillusioned Conservatives the Party he led was a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left. He spent the whole of the 1997 campaign desperately trying to convince anyone and everyone how little things would change not how much.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
Scared of their own shadow despite a 179 seat majority. Such was the power of the Establishment.
They could have done anything between 1997 and 2005 with those massive majorities. Top of the list: they should have introduced proportional representation in my opinion.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
Except they weren't in a majority. Thanks to the joys of our electoral system Thatch got big majorities with less than half the vote. Partly thanks to a divided opposition. I'll hold my hand up - I voted SDP twice.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
There's always been people thrown on the scrapheap and others who have been selfish arseholes.
But the 1980s were good for most people and most places - that everywhere outside of Southern England was one big soup kitchen seems to be a recurring fantasy of middle class leftists.
Ironically one group of places which did struggle in the 1980s were middle class inner urban areas which went significantly downhill with consequences to the Conservative vote in cities.
I used to have to travel around rural Durham in the late 80s/early 90s. Consett after the steelworks closed, Easington, Tow Law. These places were utterly devastated and London and the South felt a long way from them - geographically, economically and culturally. I still can’t get over the fact that some of these places now lie within Tory-held constituencies.
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
It's sad it was so short. By 1990 the E was way down in quality, dodgy dealers were moving in, the raves got edgier and nastier (previously they'd been incredibly peaceful), police clamped down, it all got rather sad rather quick, even the music palled.
But it was great while it lasted.
The original Summer of Love also soured quickly. Assassinations and riots and prog rock.
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
I suspect automaton and AI may be a more significant medium term threat to the back office environment than outsourcing of work.
The transport issue is worth discussion - I don't know enough about the economics but I presume the likes of South West Ttains and C2C make their money from commuter travel so it's not been fun for them in the last few weeks.
Even if passenger numbers recover slightly, the viability of a train operating model based on commuter traffic is called into question. I love train travel for leisure and will look forward to it but I suspect the train operators are going to have to make some difficult decisions and we need to ask what kind of public rail system we will need in a non-commuting future.
Getting rid of the rush hour peaks in passenger numbers would be a good thing for the railways. At present they have to provide sufficient rolling stock to meet peak demand and for the rest of the time there is an excess either running around empty or sat in the sidings.
And on a per journey basis season ticket holders pay bugger all.
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
It's sad it was so short. By 1990 the E was way down in quality, dodgy dealers were moving in, the raves got edgier and nastier (previously they'd been incredibly peaceful), police clamped down, it all got rather sad rather quick, even the music palled.
But it was great while it lasted.
The original Summer of Love also soured quickly. Assassinations and riots and prog rock.
Yes. A feature not a bug methinks. From Haight Ashbury to Altamont in a few short years
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
Except they weren't in a majority. Thanks to the joys of our electoral system Thatch got big majorities with less than half the vote. Partly thanks to a divided opposition. I'll hold my hand up - I voted SDP twice.
I found it pretty easy to stick with Labour in those days for reasons given in my post below. 2019 was the first time I didn’t vote Labour in a GE.
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
I suspect automaton and AI may be a more significant medium term threat to the back office environment than outsourcing of work.
The transport issue is worth discussion - I don't know enough about the economics but I presume the likes of South West Ttains and C2C make their money from commuter travel so it's not been fun for them in the last few weeks.
Even if passenger numbers recover slightly, the viability of a train operating model based on commuter traffic is called into question. I love train travel for leisure and will look forward to it but I suspect the train operators are going to have to make some difficult decisions and we need to ask what kind of public rail system we will need in a non-commuting future.
Getting rid of the rush hour peaks in passenger numbers would be a good thing for the railways.
At present they have to provide sufficient rolling stock to meet peak demand and for the rest of the time there is an excess either running around empty or sat in the sidings.
And on a per journey basis season ticket holders pay bugger all.
Season ticket journeys brought in 20% of revenue for about 33% of journeys and 23% of passenger km in 2019-20.
Even before COVID there was a shift away from season ticket use as more and more people were working from home more than two days a week.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
There's always been people thrown on the scrapheap and others who have been selfish arseholes.
But the 1980s were good for most people and most places - that everywhere outside of Southern England was one big soup kitchen seems to be a recurring fantasy of middle class leftists.
Ironically one group of places which did struggle in the 1980s were middle class inner urban areas which went significantly downhill with consequences to the Conservative vote in cities.
The abiding dislike/hated of Thatcher in the West of Scotland must be false consciousness or something.
Late to the thread, but I broadly agree with the argument that "Starmer will only win when he can integrate enough Blue Labour thinking to help retake the Red Wall and middle England." Or at least defuse the issues that caused Red Wall and middle England voters to abandon Labour, if not necessarily to embrace them.
Here's a poll from back in January 2013, when Miliband had not yet come out against a referendum on EU membership. Labour was 13% ahead and Leave split 36% Con to 34% Lab. Fast forward to July 2020, Labour is still 10% behind with YouGov and Leave splits 76% Con to 12% Lab.
LIkewise, in Jan 2013 the C2DE vote was 51% Lab to 24% Con. Now it's 35% Lab to 50% Con.
In Jan 2013 the 60+ vote was 37% Con to 34% Lab. Now the 65+ vote is 66% Con to 21% Lab.
Leave voters, C2DEs, pensioners - these are the groups which have swung most markedly against Labour ever since the UK's place in the EU started to become a major issue that determined voting intention.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
Except they weren't in a majority. Thanks to the joys of our electoral system Thatch got big majorities with less than half the vote. Partly thanks to a divided opposition. I'll hold my hand up - I voted SDP twice.
That's a good point - and a truly terrible confession.
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
Except they weren't in a majority. Thanks to the joys of our electoral system Thatch got big majorities with less than half the vote. Partly thanks to a divided opposition. I'll hold my hand up - I voted SDP twice.
That's a good point - and a truly terrible confession.
The SDP soaked up a lot of centrist votes that would otherwise have gone to Thatcher.
Re place. Everyone loves telecommuting when we are in the transition phase still getting paid to do real commuting. Medium-term, if workers don't need a train ticket, wages will adjust downward. If not through renegotiation, then through sending work to Brasov instead of Bradford.
Higher paid workers who already have their positions and their reputations and their contacts will love working from home.
Lower paid workers who are younger and who don't have a second bedroom and might even be living in a flatshare and who are left out of meetings and no longer get any mentoring will hate it.
A critical point - and not just because of the comfort and suitability of the home environment for working.
Older workers who shift toward home working already know their jobs and their business, and have relationships with their contacts and colleagues.
For younger workers, being in an office environment after school or university or an early job switch is a significant learning curve, during which you acquire all of the above. Being given a laptop and working from your bedsit or flat isn’t the same at all.
Tonight's Top of the Pops' are from 14th and 21st December 1989 on BBC4 at 8pm.
I'm in. It's a missing year for me. I was in Australia.
I was living in NZ. Christmas with family in Auckland. I don’t think that I missed too much at the fag end of the Eighties in the UK.
The end of the 80s was a brilliant time in the UK, certainly in London
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
I don't agree with all of it, but Andrew Marr's documentary on the Thatcher era does a good job of capturing the renewed sense of optimism.
There really was an atmosphere of positivity. A sense, fuckyeah, we're on the way back.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
In London and the South. Glad you said that. But should not be in brackets.
There were plenty of working class people all over the country in the 1980s who became, not just felt, a lot richer.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
There were plenty thrown on the scrapheap too. People voting for Thatcher gave no fucks about that because they were selfish arseholes. Unfortunately they were in the majority. See, I understand perfectly. ☺
There's always been people thrown on the scrapheap and others who have been selfish arseholes.
But the 1980s were good for most people and most places - that everywhere outside of Southern England was one big soup kitchen seems to be a recurring fantasy of middle class leftists.
Ironically one group of places which did struggle in the 1980s were middle class inner urban areas which went significantly downhill with consequences to the Conservative vote in cities.
The abiding dislike/hated of Thatcher in the West of Scotland must be false consciousness or something.
We got through without foodbanks by living off gravel, oak leaves and earth.
Comments
"Key Workers" have always been able to use office desks but, as with their children in schools, the take-up has not been what was anticipated.
I'm talking to clients who are telling me their staff don't want to come back to desks but do want an occasional get-together as you say and are looking to re-configure their office space for networking, socially distanced meetings and the like so taking out the desks in favour of more flexible space. It could well be such space could be then made available on a rental basis to other organisations (not unattractive if you have a freehold interest).
I do think getting the children back to school and the onset of autumn will, perversely, give WFH a boost. It will be easier for many to work in a house with no children - childcare costs (not unsubstantial) will be reduced and no one will have to get up and trudge up to the station or bus stop or get into the car on a cold, wet Monday morning.
I had heard this complaint from the Mayor in the press, too. Hopefully the net effect of yet greater testing availability and the new powers proposed for local authorities will mean that more targeted interventions take place in future, and we won't have more instances of a population as large as that of Leicester being restricted in this way all at once.
My own view is that some will be better and some will not.
And there is the issue of relativity as well.
If other places, London especially, struggle then that might affect how other places feel.
The central message was the basic tenets of Thatcherism were safe with him and his Government. Yes, they could and would be run better with a bit more "humanity" and without the sleaze which by then was a stench over Major and the Conservatives of whom people were tired after 18 years.
By 2001, I suspect the mood had changed and whether it was because of the 59% turnout or not, Blair was just not prepared to be radical with his landslide as were Asquith, Attlee and Thatcher.
In truth, he didn't really have a radical agenda as the others did and he ended up being defined by events initially outside his control.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1284048094586384386
The long Lawson boom, Thatcherite deregulation, the Big Bang in the City, London's population growing for the first time since 1939. It was when everything began to turn around. Also, it was the era of Really Good Ecstasy, and the second summer of love.
London in about 1986-89 was a brilliant, throbbing city on the rise.
And, of course, in 1989 The Stones Roses put out The Stone Roses
https://vimeo.com/205881931
http://camdennewjournal.com/article/extinction-rebellion-warns-euston-road-cycle-lane-jams-will-add-to-pollution
A century or more of commuting from the suburb to the office in the town is over - technology now enables work and home to be co-located. This notion of "Place" has been about for ages but was predicated on city centre residential living with work and leisure co-located.
Culturally, and you hear it from some on here, the physical dislocation of work and home led to a mental and emotional dislocation and a compartmentalisation of the two. Work is where you work, home is where you live.
As Boris Johnson is a prime example of a homeworker, albeit in Tied Accommodation so like a school caretaker, I'm surprised he has so little sympathy for the new generation of homeworkers.
In property terms, the compartmentalisation can still occur via the "Home Office" which some have had for years. This will continue and develop. Small suburban towns and villages which had become ghost towns in the day for being dormitory commuter towns now have a bright future as the homeworkers go "local" for food, recreation, eating out at lunchtime, socialising and the like.
The cafe with strong WiFi and good food will be a huge success, the Home Office scene will be huge, home deliveries will be popular and we could just see the re-vitalisation of community life as people have time in the evening to get involved so amateur dramatics, clubs and societies could all flourish.
I'm just scratching the surface - this is a real revolution.
Noticeably, Loadsamoney became a massively popular (and occasionally amusing) comedy character, in the late 80s: because he captured a truth. Suddenly, working class people (in London and the south) felt quite a lot richer.
His creators meant him to be a villain, but he became a kind of passing folk hero
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgUYUOGvVZM
Universities are going to get HAMMERED, on several fronts. Some will go out of biz
The UK economy grew continuously from 1984 to the end of 1990.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2009/nov/25/gdp-uk-1948-growth-economy
The late 80s in particular were very buoyant. Meanwhile, unemployment fell steadily, and house prices went up. Hence: Loadsamoney appearing around 1988
Affordable housing, nice countryside and good communications suit many people and that's what you can get outside the cities - Wigan's population is increasing for example.
The places which I think will continue to struggle are the 'one industry' towns too far from the main communication routes.
I see no reason why they could not add a couple of office spaces. Or pubs could do it.
They've had 76k recorded cases in a population of 10m. Even assuming only one in 10 case is identified and recorded, it means at most 7% of population have had CV-19.
That would boradly be in line with the estimates for the UK too.
Homeworking is and has been proved to be possible for a great number of people and while it has required businesses to adapt processes and procedures, those that have have seen productivity unaffected and if anything improved.
There are concerns over the mental health of homeworkers and that's an area which cannot be ignored - the notion of a "community" working space is interesting and as you say provides a valuable social aspect.
That in itself may be telling of both of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Summer_of_Love
The first raves were just bloody brilliant. Probably because the E was so good.
Dancing to mad music with 5,000 other young people. with everyone blissed and smiling because of E, and in some illegal warehouse in King's Cross with wild lights and fireworks and everyone having sex in the loos. Oh God
Ou sont les neiges d'antan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=648UkmmTG5w
I'm probably in that vid
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/30/around-third-no-coronavirus-symptoms-may-have-developed-immunity/
Lower paid workers who are younger and who don't have a second bedroom and might even be living in a flatshare and who are left out of meetings and no longer get any mentoring will hate it.
It seems that you still don't understand the results of the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
EDIT: I can't believe I forgot this. If you used to use your house for X hours a week, and now you use it for X + 24 or even X + 40, your willingness to pay must go way up.
Nothing I can do now to change that.
So I completely agree young people will get shafted (yet again) if a large section of the workforce goes to wfh permanently, which seems inevitable. The question is it going to be a shift of 10% or 30%?
The transport issue is worth discussion - I don't know enough about the economics but I presume the likes of South West Ttains and C2C make their money from commuter travel so it's not been fun for them in the last few weeks.
Even if passenger numbers recover slightly, the viability of a train operating model based on commuter traffic is called into question. I love train travel for leisure and will look forward to it but I suspect the train operators are going to have to make some difficult decisions and we need to ask what kind of public rail system we will need in a non-commuting future.
But it was great while it lasted.
But the 1980s were good for most people and most places - that everywhere outside of Southern England was one big soup kitchen seems to be a recurring fantasy of middle class leftists.
Ironically one group of places which did struggle in the 1980s were middle class inner urban areas which went significantly downhill with consequences to the Conservative vote in cities.
Fallecidos:28.420
Fallecidos últimos 7 días: 10
Recuperados:18-05-2020150.376
Hospitalizados: 125.937 Hospitalizados últimos 7 días: 228 UCI: 11.728 UCI últimos 7 días: 18
PCR totales: 2.536.234
PCR/1000 hab: 53,8 Incremento capacidad PCR última semana: 14%
And on a per journey basis season ticket holders pay bugger all.
Yes. A feature not a bug methinks. From Haight Ashbury to Altamont in a few short years
"Tony Elliott: Time Out magazine founder dies aged 73"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53452554
Even before COVID there was a shift away from season ticket use as more and more people were working from home more than two days a week.
Here's a poll from back in January 2013, when Miliband had not yet come out against a referendum on EU membership. Labour was 13% ahead and Leave split 36% Con to 34% Lab. Fast forward to July 2020, Labour is still 10% behind with YouGov and Leave splits 76% Con to 12% Lab.
LIkewise, in Jan 2013 the C2DE vote was 51% Lab to 24% Con. Now it's 35% Lab to 50% Con.
In Jan 2013 the 60+ vote was 37% Con to 34% Lab. Now the 65+ vote is 66% Con to 21% Lab.
Leave voters, C2DEs, pensioners - these are the groups which have swung most markedly against Labour ever since the UK's place in the EU started to become a major issue that determined voting intention.
Older workers who shift toward home working already know their jobs and their business, and have relationships with their contacts and colleagues.
For younger workers, being in an office environment after school or university or an early job switch is a significant learning curve, during which you acquire all of the above. Being given a laptop and working from your bedsit or flat isn’t the same at all.