Bloody hell. I wish this government well but the priority given to party unity over competence is depressing.
Don't agree with the twitter feed comment though. I would think it more likely that IDS ends up proposing "simplified" regulations which are about 3x as long as the original and don't actually, you know, work. See UC.
You deal with a threat by having the power to overcome it, not by collywobbling all the time. It is rather silly to see portentous warnings about 'global threats' on PB, but any suggestion of what we can do amounting to little more than - nothing unless America is doing it and tells us to help.
The lesson of history tells us we need to build up the Navy. I am not experienced in defence matters, but I would suggest that small carriers and crafts capable of moving fast and mounting effective, quick operations would be better than vast carriers that we can't afford the aircraft for. A truly independent and usable nuclear capability would also be a plus.
IANAE either but I think all militaries should be reviewing the Azerbaijan conflict very carefully. Cheap unmanned drones turned out to be key. I suspect that is the future of warfare with on the ground human involvement rapidly becoming less significant and less effective. We should probably be investing accordingly.
Yes, definitely, those too.
And speaking of un-manned defence, I also don't see why we can't bury torpedo tubes under the sea all around the UK coastline. Far more flexible and dangerous than a one-chance strategic nuke that everybody knows we'd never fire.
Not a new idea - the remains of late Victorian sites for wire-guided powered torpedoes are visible in various places such as Fort Victoria near Yarmouth on IoW.
Think how many you would need to cover the coastline. Too short ranged, too slow at longer ranges unless you are using way-out stuff like rockets or what are effectively expensive slf-guided mini-subs - ie underwater drones (but unmanned). Also to some extent vulnerable to passive and active defences nowadays. And you need a sensor system to identify and track targets. And persons controlling them.
What are you planning to torpedo?
The Germans are quite unlikely to re-float the Blucher, declare war and send her cruising up the Thames.....
Aside from that, no conceivable attack on the UK involves getting within 10 miles of the coast, on or below the water.
Cruise missiles are the first thing that comes to mind....
As Hermann Khan observed, the enemy has a nasty habit of observing what your capabilities are and doing something else.
Coastal cities and defence installations of hostile countries.
If you really want that kind of capability - google CAPTOR mines....
I think there's now the distinct possibility that Sir Keir could do worse than Jezza in 2019. Will the vaccine rollout be Boris's Falkland's moment? Hitherto, many liked Boris and thought he was a bit of a lad; but now - by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly - Boris has soared to the heights of domestic mega-competent and world statesman. His base will be rock solid because he socked one to the dastardly EU, and I can't see him not picking up some extra votes along the way. Moreover, it's perfectly possibility that Sir Keir will lose much of the support Jezza drummed up amongst the idealistic youth. What to do?
Don’t know if he will do worse than Jezza in 2019 or not, but I think you’re pretty spot on with the scenario you paint
Agree as was your comment about him, as with others, competing against someone who is better at selling ideas to the British public than him.
I yield to no one in my estimation of Boris' ability and capability to be PM (very low). But you just can't help liking him on a personal level.
I have been at charity dinners where he was due to speak and, when it was rumoured that he had entered the building, there was a tangible buzz of excitement. Even, or rather especially from the old girls in pearls.
My brother's met him and says he has big charisma. Not a shock really when you think about it. He's won every election he's stood in, been London Mayor, Foreign Secretary, and is now PM, despite being palpably devoid of almost all the qualities needed to perform well in those jobs. So it can't be anything but charisma, can it?
And some free advice to Sir Keir's speechwriters: when the Leader of the Opposition announces a policy (especially an old-hat one re-branded as a 'British Recovery Bond'), it really doesn't help to have him say "This is bold, it’s innovative." [Titter ye not at the back - that is a real quote from the speech.]
If it really is bold and innovative, you don't need to say so. And if, like this announcement, it's tired, old-hat and of no benefit, marking your own homework as bold and innovative just looks silly.
Perhaps he should have had a light suit, Stravinsky to introduce himself and as background some very abstract art?
I would nominate Lisbon as the friendliest city, although havent been to a huge number of places.
We visited Lisbon for the first time two years ago. We loved it. Best city I`ve visited I think. And has great beaches nearby too.
I've had great friendliness and hospitality all over the world. I generally find that the worse the place, the more friendly the people because
a) they're not used to seeing foreigners, so less likely to treat them as walking ATMs b) they generally have an inferiority complex towards the better known cities c) in poorer places, people have to rely on each other to cope with little disasters much more.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond". It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
Bonds are quite complicated as a retail offering. Coupons and tenor and duration and whatnot.
Not to say there won't be an illustrated guide making the simple argument about investment and interest but you must stop thinking that everyone out there is as sophisticated as you are.
I don't really get the point given that, for now at least, government can borrow both very long and very cheap.
Togetherness. Plus a nod to small savers. "Sick of getting nothing on our little nestegg. You work hard all your life ..."
This is often heard in the Red Wall, I bet.
It's economically incoherent.
If he wishes to subsidise small savers, then say so. But by doing so, he can borrow less overall, not more. It's a fake 'togetherness'.
Easy as it is to criticise Keith's non-announcements in his speech, it isn't really any different to the gulf in government. They have slogans - "level up" and "build back better". Neither have any cash or actual policies of substance in them.
Its really sad when you think about it. Even the "culture war" thing is just a stunt so that both sides and holler outrages at each other whilst most of us just roll our eyes and try to ignore them.
My perspective? Take many steps back and go acro instead of micro. We need to spend vast £fucktons on infrastructure whether it be housing that people can actually afford or broadband infrastructure or road/rail capacity or simple renewal of aged half broken crap. We can't leave that to the private sector as most doesn't happen and the rest is profiteering. We can't leave it to the public sector as "how we going to afford that" and crap.
So we need to copy our friends in Europe. Create state owned commercial enterprises. State owned because its national strategic infrastructure, commercial because it actually needs to happen. Neither Labour nor the Tories can sell it for the same reasons - the public/private sector can't be the answer.
Whats worse, most of the investment is at least 2 parliamentary cycles long if not double that. "How can we afford that" is called "capitalism" - invest, gain a return on the investment. But it doesn't work with a change of government scrapping it half way through. Which is why the UK is is such a poor state compared to so many other countries.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
Escape bid at Hotel Quarantine! Moment guest makes dash for freedom through foyer of Heathrow Radisson Blu towards the door... but is held back by army of security guards while he demands 'fresh air'
But Mr Pium today told MailOnline of his anguish of been detained at Heathrow last night, after he flew in from Sao Paulo, where he was working for his travel agency Sky Fly Travel. These rules came in three days ago and I've been trying to get back from Brazil where I supposed to stay for five days since December.
A cursory glance will show you reveal "Sky Fly Travel" isn't a legit business. I am presuming this is another way people are getting around any restrictions, by setting up a front business which they then claim it is essential they continue to travel the globe.
If I was him I think I would have kept quiet about his supposed business.
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
Farage voter says that Keir Starmer is "nasty".
Do we have a category prize for this?
I am not and never have been a Farage voter.
Apart from voting for a party led by him.
I voted to leave the EU, have the British contingent of the European Parliament abolished and Farage tossed out as an elected politician as a result, yes.
I'd do it again. No regrets from voting to evict Farage.
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
An interesting LD prospectus. Needs some proposals for raising significant taxes to pay for it.
1 - Could cost £5bn a year. 2 - Hope that psychosis does not increase. Would tax on this pay for 1 and 8? 3 - Pros and cons to debate. Potentially might help LDs a little with the 52% they defined as thick racists, whilst keeping their FBPE tendency on board. 4 - Yes - though we have a fully worked out set of proposals from some time ago for adjusting Council Tax / Stamp Duty which are far better. IMO Land Tax is based far too heavily on future usage class guesses by bureaucrats, and the last set of published proposals had not thought through consequences in any serious way. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes if not just a bandwagon a la Australia. 7 - Very questionable / shot in the dark. I prefer Experiments with Mice by Johnny Dankworth. 8 - Yes, but how to raise £4bn a year for the BBC? 9 - Yes 10 - Would this be combined with any changes? Tories currently planning to throw it all in the air again afaics.
Tax cannabis. Tax mobile / broadband connections (to pay for the BBC). Council > Land tax would need to be cost neutral, at least over time.
I am only suggesting experimenting with UBI. I’d pick a few smaller towns: say, Derry, Worcester and Dover, and see what happens.
4 A development land tax would be preferanle, as it would push down profits from countryside land sales generally in my experience helping the Tories in local government and their mates. In my view this is a prime source of corruption at local government level. Farmland which as soon as being designated as development land suddenly appreciates 1000% is not earned income and even if done fairly unduly benefits the landowner for no effort, encourages land ownership rather than appropriate use.
How much headroom do you think you have on Planning Gain taxes?
And some free advice to Sir Keir's speechwriters: when the Leader of the Opposition announces a policy (especially an old-hat one re-branded as a 'British Recovery Bond'), it really doesn't help to have him say "This is bold, it’s innovative." [Titter ye not at the back - that is a real quote from the speech.]
If it really is bold and innovative, you don't need to say so. And if, like this announcement, it's tired, old-hat and of no benefit, marking your own homework as bold and innovative just looks silly.
As an American Trade Unionist once remarked, "Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you ain't"
And some free advice to Sir Keir's speechwriters: when the Leader of the Opposition announces a policy (especially an old-hat one re-branded as a 'British Recovery Bond'), it really doesn't help to have him say "This is bold, it’s innovative." [Titter ye not at the back - that is a real quote from the speech.]
If it really is bold and innovative, you don't need to say so. And if, like this announcement, it's tired, old-hat and of no benefit, marking your own homework as bold and innovative just looks silly.
Its like a 'comedy' impressionist who feels the need to say the name of the person they're impersonating.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
What the actual eff ? How is that anything more than a sincere for a tw&t ?
...The government claims that the TIGRR will "identify and develop proposals across a range of areas that will drive innovation and competitiveness, reduce barriers to start-ups and scale-ups, create opportunities for innovation to make the most of cutting-edge technologies, and support growth and dynamism right across the UK economy"....
What bits of 'innovation', 'start-ups', or 'cutting edge technologies' does IDS have any experience or knowledge of ?
This is the best I can come up with: ...Duncan Smith worked for GEC Marconi in the 1980s and attended the company's staff college Dunchurch College of Management. He did not gain any qualifications at Dunchurch and completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to roughly a month in total...
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
I keep hearing that argument from PB Conservatives as they cast around for some angle to attack Starmer on. The argument appeals only to those who would never vote Labour in a million years.
Starmer took Corbyn down, something that I had just about despaired of happening. For that he deserves and gets great credit.
It is very obviously the case that Starmer's task would have been much harder if he had positioned himself as an outspoken critic of Corbyn from the start. The likes of Hilary Benn or Yvette Cooper would probably not have won in 2020, even against the awful Long-Bailey.
Starmer was astute enough to realise what was the best course to get rid of Corbyn, distancing himself from Corbyn within the tent without being overtly disloyal, and he followed it. People know that he did what was necessary, why should that attract any criticism?
He's no more a careerist than any politician, and probably a lot less than most considering the career he gave up to stand as a humble Labour MP in 2015. What he is though is a very astute politician.
I thought that today's speech was very good, timely, and likely to appeal to those whose votes are up for grabs. The spirit of 1945. Referencing Attlee. War bonds. The equivalent of "and now win the peace" and all that. All good themes and ones which can provide a focus that Starmer can define himself around.
Starmer took Corbyn down?
I think you'll find it was Boris that took Corbyn down. Starmer just clung close enough to Corbyn he could take the reins once he stepped down.
Yes, of course I mean that Starmer took Corbyn's annointed successor down.
And I give credit for Starmer to clinging just close enough (and no closer) to Corbyn that he could take over the reins.
Incidently, sorry for the delay in replying. In the interim I've been off to the local NHS clinic for the jab, gone straight in, no queue, waited 15 minutes afterwards, came home. All very efficient.
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
An interesting LD prospectus. Needs some proposals for raising significant taxes to pay for it.
1 - Could cost £5bn a year. 2 - Hope that psychosis does not increase. Would tax on this pay for 1 and 8? 3 - Pros and cons to debate. Potentially might help LDs a little with the 52% they defined as thick racists, whilst keeping their FBPE tendency on board. 4 - Yes - though we have a fully worked out set of proposals from some time ago for adjusting Council Tax / Stamp Duty which are far better. IMO Land Tax is based far too heavily on future usage class guesses by bureaucrats, and the last set of published proposals had not thought through consequences in any serious way. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes if not just a bandwagon a la Australia. 7 - Very questionable / shot in the dark. I prefer Experiments with Mice by Johnny Dankworth. 8 - Yes, but how to raise £4bn a year for the BBC? 9 - Yes 10 - Would this be combined with any changes? Tories currently planning to throw it all in the air again afaics.
Tax cannabis. Tax mobile / broadband connections (to pay for the BBC). Council > Land tax would need to be cost neutral, at least over time.
I am only suggesting experimenting with UBI. I’d pick a few smaller towns: say, Derry, Worcester and Dover, and see what happens.
4 A development land tax would be preferanle, as it would push down profits from countryside land sales generally in my experience helping the Tories in local government and their mates. In my view this is a prime source of corruption at local government level. Farmland which as soon as being designated as development land suddenly appreciates 1000% is not earned income and even if done fairly unduly benefits the landowner for no effort, encourages land ownership rather than appropriate use.
Whats wrong with PR for national elections? The Irish seem to be pretty well governed and the system they use (STV) was invented by an Englishman in 1819 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Wright_Hill . Invention of computers and the internet means that the main argument against - it is complicated to allocate votes for 2nd , 3rd choices etc - are negated. The computers can work out who has won in a flash and all the base data can be published online so anyone can do their own checks if they think there is a problem.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
Easy as it is to criticise Keith's non-announcements in his speech, it isn't really any different to the gulf in government. They have slogans - "level up" and "build back better". Neither have any cash or actual policies of substance in them.
Its really sad when you think about it. Even the "culture war" thing is just a stunt so that both sides and holler outrages at each other whilst most of us just roll our eyes and try to ignore them.
My perspective? Take many steps back and go acro instead of micro. We need to spend vast £fucktons on infrastructure whether it be housing that people can actually afford or broadband infrastructure or road/rail capacity or simple renewal of aged half broken crap. We can't leave that to the private sector as most doesn't happen and the rest is profiteering. We can't leave it to the public sector as "how we going to afford that" and crap.
So we need to copy our friends in Europe. Create state owned commercial enterprises. State owned because its national strategic infrastructure, commercial because it actually needs to happen. Neither Labour nor the Tories can sell it for the same reasons - the public/private sector can't be the answer.
Whats worse, most of the investment is at least 2 parliamentary cycles long if not double that. "How can we afford that" is called "capitalism" - invest, gain a return on the investment. But it doesn't work with a change of government scrapping it half way through. Which is why the UK is is such a poor state compared to so many other countries.
Which major countries are you thinking about that the UK is really poor compared to?
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
I keep hearing that argument from PB Conservatives as they cast around for some angle to attack Starmer on. The argument appeals only to those who would never vote Labour in a million years.
Starmer took Corbyn down, something that I had just about despaired of happening. For that he deserves and gets great credit.
It is very obviously the case that Starmer's task would have been much harder if he had positioned himself as an outspoken critic of Corbyn from the start. The likes of Hilary Benn or Yvette Cooper would probably not have won in 2020, even against the awful Long-Bailey.
Starmer was astute enough to realise what was the best course to get rid of Corbyn, distancing himself from Corbyn within the tent without being overtly disloyal, and he followed it. People know that he did what was necessary, why should that attract any criticism?
He's no more a careerist than any politician, and probably a lot less than most considering the career he gave up to stand as a humble Labour MP in 2015. What he is though is a very astute politician.
I thought that today's speech was very good, timely, and likely to appeal to those whose votes are up for grabs. The spirit of 1945. Referencing Attlee. War bonds. The equivalent of "and now win the peace" and all that. All good themes and ones which can provide a focus that Starmer can define himself around.
Starmer took Corbyn down?
I think you'll find it was Boris that took Corbyn down. Starmer just clung close enough to Corbyn he could take the reins once he stepped down.
Yes, of course I mean that Starmer took Corbyn's annointed successor down.
And I give credit for Starmer to clinging just close enough (and no closer) to Corbyn that he could take over the reins.
Incidently, sorry for the delay in replying. In the interim I've been off to the local NHS clinic for the jab, gone straight in, no queue, waited 15 minutes afterwards, came home. All very efficient.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Today's dire speech won't mark the death of his career though.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Today's dire speech won't mark the death of his career though.
And some free advice to Sir Keir's speechwriters: when the Leader of the Opposition announces a policy (especially an old-hat one re-branded as a 'British Recovery Bond'), it really doesn't help to have him say "This is bold, it’s innovative." [Titter ye not at the back - that is a real quote from the speech.]
If it really is bold and innovative, you don't need to say so. And if, like this announcement, it's tired, old-hat and of no benefit, marking your own homework as bold and innovative just looks silly.
Its like a 'comedy' impressionist who feels the need to say the name of the person they're impersonating.
Or in a cartoon, having the name of the cartooned written on their podium....
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Today's dire speech won't mark the death of his career though.
It will wait to die another day.
But when it does die the voters won't have a Quantum of Solace about it.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
No, we need to start thinking about how to handle capacity for both doses needing to be given simultaneously and ensuring that neither programme slows down in the interim.
Exactly, as the second doses build up we need to increase the total number of vaccinations given even to stay at the current rate. That is why an 8% increase over a week doesn't really cut it.
I expect supply of Pfizer is being stockpiled right now because we can't rely on a JiT supply chain for what we have done as we've disregarded the manufacturer recommendation and not held 50% of received doses back for three weeks later.
I'm guessing essentially we've done nine weeks of JIT and are now doing the three week stockpiling?
I do think it's weird how Labourites keep dismissing my advice as if I'm some deep-state Conservative agent designed to throw them wholly off the scent.
I think there's now the distinct possibility that Sir Keir could do worse than Jezza in 2019. Will the vaccine rollout be Boris's Falkland's moment? Hitherto, many liked Boris and thought he was a bit of a lad; but now - by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly - Boris has soared to the heights of domestic mega-competent and world statesman. His base will be rock solid because he socked one to the dastardly EU, and I can't see him not picking up some extra votes along the way. Moreover, it's perfectly possibility that Sir Keir will lose much of the support Jezza drummed up amongst the idealistic youth. What to do?
Don’t know if he will do worse than Jezza in 2019 or not, but I think you’re pretty spot on with the scenario you paint
Agree as was your comment about him, as with others, competing against someone who is better at selling ideas to the British public than him.
I yield to no one in my estimation of Boris' ability and capability to be PM (very low). But you just can't help liking him on a personal level.
I have been at charity dinners where he was due to speak and, when it was rumoured that he had entered the building, there was a tangible buzz of excitement. Even, or rather especially from the old girls in pearls.
One of my best friends had a top job on the LIFFE floor by 23, retired at 29, millionaire by 30, women queuing up to date him, the widest circle of friends of anyone I knew, & a dozen or more lifelong close mates. I knew him as well as anyone and he could be thoughtless, selfish pig headed, and wind me up no end with his double standards, but he was charming, had bundles of charisma, a lovely smile, the greatest company, remembered everyone’s name and something about their life to talk about, and that’s what made him the successful, popular person he was. His faults were forgivable because you couldn’t help but love him. Sadly he also suffered with depression and took his own life last month, a devastating blow to my friends and I.
I think earnest types who play everything with a straight bat and live via spreadsheets can be left baffled by the popularity of those who dazzle despite their inconsistencies. We see it with Boris vs Sir Keir in no uncertain terms. I was a bit baffled at times by my friends success with women, in business, etc, I often thought ‘he’s blagging that, can’t they tell?’ but the truth was it didn’t really matter, some people are magnetic, and that’s what you need to be to get people to believe in you
What the actual eff ? How is that anything more than a sincere for a tw&t ?
...The government claims that the TIGRR will "identify and develop proposals across a range of areas that will drive innovation and competitiveness, reduce barriers to start-ups and scale-ups, create opportunities for innovation to make the most of cutting-edge technologies, and support growth and dynamism right across the UK economy"....
What bits of 'innovation', 'start-ups', or 'cutting edge technologies' does IDS have any experience or knowledge of ?
This is the best I can come up with: ...Duncan Smith worked for GEC Marconi in the 1980s and attended the company's staff college Dunchurch College of Management. He did not gain any qualifications at Dunchurch and completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to roughly a month in total...
Well if he worked for GEC in 1980s he will at least know how NOT to run an innovation business.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond". It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Starmer isn't doing the graveyard shift that Hague was obliged to do, but he's certainly doing the 5am farmer wake-up call.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
Bonds are quite complicated as a retail offering. Coupons and tenor and duration and whatnot.
Not to say there won't be an illustrated guide making the simple argument about investment and interest but you must stop thinking that everyone out there is as sophisticated as you are.
I don't really get the point given that, for now at least, government can borrow both very long and very cheap.
Togetherness. Plus a nod to small savers. "Sick of getting nothing on our little nestegg. You work hard all your life ..."
This is often heard in the Red Wall, I bet.
It's economically incoherent.
If he wishes to subsidise small savers, then say so. But by doing so, he can borrow less overall, not more. It's a fake 'togetherness'.
I don't think it is fake. Not if it's done properly and catches on. It's a collectivist bond equivalent of Thatcher's popular shareholding vision. Having millions across the country investing modestly but meaningfully in a Citizens Bond could generate huge sums and it has - or could have - a very different feel to gilts bought by big professional players or money printed by the BoE.
If people really go for it, it would feed on itself. It could become a regular topic of conversation alongside the usual of house prices, football, the weather and schools.
"How much have you got?" "Did you see the rate on the latest tranche?" "I've heard they'll be funding abc. About time." "Just wish you were allowed more than £X." Etc.
I'm not saying it's bound to work brilliantly, maybe it would flop, but I can definitely see the potential. Raise serious funds. Cut out middlemen. Help small savers. Create a collective sense of can-do and collaboration between government and people.
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
An interesting LD prospectus. Needs some proposals for raising significant taxes to pay for it.
1 - Could cost £5bn a year. 2 - Hope that psychosis does not increase. Would tax on this pay for 1 and 8? 3 - Pros and cons to debate. Potentially might help LDs a little with the 52% they defined as thick racists, whilst keeping their FBPE tendency on board. 4 - Yes - though we have a fully worked out set of proposals from some time ago for adjusting Council Tax / Stamp Duty which are far better. IMO Land Tax is based far too heavily on future usage class guesses by bureaucrats, and the last set of published proposals had not thought through consequences in any serious way. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes if not just a bandwagon a la Australia. 7 - Very questionable / shot in the dark. I prefer Experiments with Mice by Johnny Dankworth. 8 - Yes, but how to raise £4bn a year for the BBC? 9 - Yes 10 - Would this be combined with any changes? Tories currently planning to throw it all in the air again afaics.
Tax cannabis. Tax mobile / broadband connections (to pay for the BBC). Council > Land tax would need to be cost neutral, at least over time.
I am only suggesting experimenting with UBI. I’d pick a few smaller towns: say, Derry, Worcester and Dover, and see what happens.
4 A development land tax would be preferanle, as it would push down profits from countryside land sales generally in my experience helping the Tories in local government and their mates. In my view this is a prime source of corruption at local government level. Farmland which as soon as being designated as development land suddenly appreciates 1000% is not earned income and even if done fairly unduly benefits the landowner for no effort, encourages land ownership rather than appropriate use.
Whats wrong with PR for national elections? The Irish seem to be pretty well governed and the system they use (STV) was invented by an Englishman in 1819 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Wright_Hill . Invention of computers and the internet means that the main argument against - it is complicated to allocate votes for 2nd , 3rd choices etc - are negated. The computers can work out who has won in a flash and all the base data can be published online so anyone can do their own checks if they think there is a problem.
The main argument against it isn't that it is too difficult to count or use. The main argument against it is that you don't know what you have voted for until after all the votes are counted whereas fptp the coalitions which are the current parties actually agree a policy platform before you vote
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Today's dire speech won't mark the death of his career though.
I would nominate Lisbon as the friendliest city, although havent been to a huge number of places.
Perth, WA is friendly. Although, as the world's most remote city, they might just be unnaturally glad of the company....
Everyone in Nazareth was friendly when I went there.
I though it was Bethlehem which had the reputation for welcoming wise men ?
At Nazareth it’s pure myrrhder.
I didn’t get to Bethlehem, although I did get within long sight of it. I was politely advised by the Israeli immigration officials that if I went into the West Bank as a single man travelling alone they would assume I was a terrorist and respond accordingly.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Today's dire speech won't mark the death of his career though.
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
No, we need to start thinking about how to handle capacity for both doses needing to be given simultaneously and ensuring that neither programme slows down in the interim.
Exactly, as the second doses build up we need to increase the total number of vaccinations given even to stay at the current rate. That is why an 8% increase over a week doesn't really cut it.
I expect supply of Pfizer is being stockpiled right now because we can't rely on a JiT supply chain for what we have done as we've disregarded the manufacturer recommendation and not held 50% of received doses back for three weeks later.
I'm guessing essentially we've done nine weeks of JIT and are now doing the three week stockpiling?
I can see no sense in stockpiling. Just get as many 1st doses done before we have to start doing the second doses.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
Bonds are quite complicated as a retail offering. Coupons and tenor and duration and whatnot.
Not to say there won't be an illustrated guide making the simple argument about investment and interest but you must stop thinking that everyone out there is as sophisticated as you are.
I don't really get the point given that, for now at least, government can borrow both very long and very cheap.
Togetherness. Plus a nod to small savers. "Sick of getting nothing on our little nestegg. You work hard all your life ..."
This is often heard in the Red Wall, I bet.
It's economically incoherent.
If he wishes to subsidise small savers, then say so. But by doing so, he can borrow less overall, not more. It's a fake 'togetherness'.
I don't think it is fake. Not if it's done properly and catches on. It's a collectivist bond equivalent of Thatcher's popular shareholding vision. Having millions across the country investing modestly but meaningfully in a Citizens Bond could generate huge sums and it has - or could have - a very different feel to gilts bought by big professional players or money printed by the BoE.
If people really go for it, it would feed on itself. It could become a regular topic of conversation alongside the usual of house prices, football, the weather and schools.
"How much have you got?" "Did you see the rate on the latest tranche?" "I've heard they'll be funding abc. About time." "Just wish you were allowed more than £X." Etc.
I'm not saying it's bound to work brilliantly, maybe it would flop, but I can definitely see the potential. Raise serious funds. Cut out middlemen. Help small savers. Create a collective sense of can-do and collaboration between government and people.
It is absolutely fake if government can borrow the money cheaper on the open market. And the wider the differential between the rates they are offering and market rates, the more fake.
Sure, subsidise saving if you wish - and make the case for that. But don't pretend that it's a way to sort out the government finances, or an attractive way for government to fund investment, as it isn't.
What Starmer appears to be suggesting is a Potemkin Bond.
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
No, we need to start thinking about how to handle capacity for both doses needing to be given simultaneously and ensuring that neither programme slows down in the interim.
Exactly, as the second doses build up we need to increase the total number of vaccinations given even to stay at the current rate. That is why an 8% increase over a week doesn't really cut it.
I expect supply of Pfizer is being stockpiled right now because we can't rely on a JiT supply chain for what we have done as we've disregarded the manufacturer recommendation and not held 50% of received doses back for three weeks later.
I'm guessing essentially we've done nine weeks of JIT and are now doing the three week stockpiling?
I can see no sense in stockpiling. Just get as many 1st doses done before we have to start doing the second doses.
Unless we can guarantee supply for second doses then we need to have a fairly large stockpile to avoid a situation where we're unable to stick to the 12 week gap. Pfizer recommend that half of delivered doses are held back for second doses, we haven't done that do we can't rely on them to bail us out if we start falling behind.
I see after all his failed attempted at trying to cherry pick numbers to enable to post comparison charts between EU and UK to appear to be doing similar, his latest pivot is to claim it is just impossible to compare now because of different strategies.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Today's dire speech won't mark the death of his career though.
I'm a big fan of Starmer's retail bond offering idea.
However, there's no chance of me voting for him to implement it, and I'm exactly the sort of person who should not be benefiting from a Labour manifesto. I therefore conclude he's either given up on recovering the voters lost under his immediate predecessors and is pivoting even further towards the middle classes, or he's lost his mind.
What the actual eff ? How is that anything more than a sincere for a tw&t ?
...The government claims that the TIGRR will "identify and develop proposals across a range of areas that will drive innovation and competitiveness, reduce barriers to start-ups and scale-ups, create opportunities for innovation to make the most of cutting-edge technologies, and support growth and dynamism right across the UK economy"....
What bits of 'innovation', 'start-ups', or 'cutting edge technologies' does IDS have any experience or knowledge of ?
This is the best I can come up with: ...Duncan Smith worked for GEC Marconi in the 1980s and attended the company's staff college Dunchurch College of Management. He did not gain any qualifications at Dunchurch and completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to roughly a month in total...
Well if he worked for GEC in 1980s he will at least know how NOT to run an innovation business.
Perhaps it's like the vaccine.
The most important thing was that Boris knew he knew nothing about it, so delegated and kept well clear.
I can't remember the names of those Dunchurch Courses, but I suspect I did the same ones. One exercise was the "fume tubes" manufacturing game.
It might have been called "Business Skills". Really quite good.
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
No, we need to start thinking about how to handle capacity for both doses needing to be given simultaneously and ensuring that neither programme slows down in the interim.
Exactly, as the second doses build up we need to increase the total number of vaccinations given even to stay at the current rate. That is why an 8% increase over a week doesn't really cut it.
I expect supply of Pfizer is being stockpiled right now because we can't rely on a JiT supply chain for what we have done as we've disregarded the manufacturer recommendation and not held 50% of received doses back for three weeks later.
I'm guessing essentially we've done nine weeks of JIT and are now doing the three week stockpiling?
I can see no sense in stockpiling. Just get as many 1st doses done before we have to start doing the second doses.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
I'm glad you approve.
Confirms its a bad idea.
PS curious about the idea you're a "new base". Which was the last General Election you didn't vote Labour? Which was the last General Election you did vote Tory?
Fair question and pleased to answer. I've always voted Labour but I'm part of what you'd call the new metro base rather than the old Red Wally (sic) base. I'm a metro progressive not a Red Wally. New metro base" means the group who have taken over as the base not that every individual member of it is a new Labour voter.
You two keeping the double-act going then.
- Alan Partridge and Cheeky Monkey.
'Red Wally' was very good - is that one of yours?
Yes. To be used sparingly obviously. Must not diss the voters.
Given how so much of the media these days is just copy / paste based on other journalists tweets, I wonder if any British media outlets will fall for the fake new CNN / Comedy Dave on the AZN contracts?
We saw it with the FT bullshit about COVID moonshot testing costs, when in a similar vein their journalist didn't read the tender documents properly and just saw COVID, testing, mega bucks....resulting in firstly their nonsense piece and then within 24hrs pretty much every other newspaper reporting it as fact.
And another piece of free advice: sack whoever came up with the line "If I were Prime Minister, I would introduce a new British Recovery Bond. It makes him sound like a ten-year old, and leads you to think not only that he never will be Prime Minister, but also that he knows he never will be.
Are you saying his obsession with this Bond is not Moore sensible than his previous strategy?
It's a Connnery in the coal mine. And it's fallen off its perch.
By your standards, that wasn’t exactly an example of Piercing wit.
The voters are going to give Kir "Casino" Royale the gold finger.....
Today's dire speech won't mark the death of his career though.
It will wait to die another day.
But don’t forget, you only live twice.
The man with the golden pun.
I am licensed to thrill.
Ydoethur, No.
Why? I’ve no Quarrel with you. Or are you just trying to make the atmosphere Leiter?
Glasgow is bloody lovely. Far better than Edinburgh.
It's fashionable to say that but, really...Edinburgh is an amazing city with a superb setting - the Castle, Salisbury Crags, Arthur's Seat, etc etc. There's really no comparison - and I quite like Glasgow.
Possibly just a coincidence, but the poster was printed by 'Bowman Rebecchi' which is owned by the son of Ciano Rebecchi, a long-time Lib Dem councillor in Inverclyde.
Comments
Don't agree with the twitter feed comment though. I would think it more likely that IDS ends up proposing "simplified" regulations which are about 3x as long as the original and don't actually, you know, work. See UC.
https://youtu.be/suHIvvMLWUw
a) they're not used to seeing foreigners, so less likely to treat them as walking ATMs
b) they generally have an inferiority complex towards the better known cities
c) in poorer places, people have to rely on each other to cope with little disasters much more.
But of course that's only a general rule.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKoCV9v7MzQ
https://twitter.com/AnErrorOfComedy/status/1362142812842639365?s=20
If he wishes to subsidise small savers, then say so. But by doing so, he can borrow less overall, not more.
It's a fake 'togetherness'.
Its really sad when you think about it. Even the "culture war" thing is just a stunt so that both sides and holler outrages at each other whilst most of us just roll our eyes and try to ignore them.
My perspective? Take many steps back and go acro instead of micro. We need to spend vast £fucktons on infrastructure whether it be housing that people can actually afford or broadband infrastructure or road/rail capacity or simple renewal of aged half broken crap. We can't leave that to the private sector as most doesn't happen and the rest is profiteering. We can't leave it to the public sector as "how we going to afford that" and crap.
So we need to copy our friends in Europe. Create state owned commercial enterprises. State owned because its national strategic infrastructure, commercial because it actually needs to happen. Neither Labour nor the Tories can sell it for the same reasons - the public/private sector can't be the answer.
Whats worse, most of the investment is at least 2 parliamentary cycles long if not double that. "How can we afford that" is called "capitalism" - invest, gain a return on the investment. But it doesn't work with a change of government scrapping it half way through. Which is why the UK is is such a poor state compared to so many other countries.
But Mr Pium today told MailOnline of his anguish of been detained at Heathrow last night, after he flew in from Sao Paulo, where he was working for his travel agency Sky Fly Travel. These rules came in three days ago and I've been trying to get back from Brazil where I supposed to stay for five days since December.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9273895/Hotel-quarantine-guest-gives-thumbs-room-window.html
A cursory glance will show you reveal "Sky Fly Travel" isn't a legit business. I am presuming this is another way people are getting around any restrictions, by setting up a front business which they then claim it is essential they continue to travel the globe.
If I was him I think I would have kept quiet about his supposed business.
I'd do it again. No regrets from voting to evict Farage.
This already raises a lot - eg £7bn in 2018-19.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/907203/The_Value_and_Incidence_of_Developer_Contributions_in_England_201819.pdf
I Lolled somewhat at "no effort".
Have you ever taken a significant plot through Planning?
How is that anything more than a sincere for a tw&t ?
...The government claims that the TIGRR will "identify and develop proposals across a range of areas that will drive innovation and competitiveness, reduce barriers to start-ups and scale-ups, create opportunities for innovation to make the most of cutting-edge technologies, and support growth and dynamism right across the UK economy"....
What bits of 'innovation', 'start-ups', or 'cutting edge technologies' does IDS have any experience or knowledge of ?
This is the best I can come up with:
...Duncan Smith worked for GEC Marconi in the 1980s and attended the company's staff college Dunchurch College of Management. He did not gain any qualifications at Dunchurch and completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to roughly a month in total...
And I give credit for Starmer to clinging just close enough (and no closer) to Corbyn that he could take over the reins.
Incidently, sorry for the delay in replying. In the interim I've been off to the local NHS clinic for the jab, gone straight in, no queue, waited 15 minutes afterwards, came home. All very efficient.
It will wait to die another day.
The pandemic has been like a war that requires the loss of freedoms but ministers must commit to restoring them soon
David Aaronovitch“ {£}
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-wont-give-up-covid-powers-easily-nw0g0mbpt
I've found Glasgow about as friendly as wartime Berlin if you're audibly English.
I do think it's weird how Labourites keep dismissing my advice as if I'm some deep-state Conservative agent designed to throw them wholly off the scent.
I'm not. And my advice is entirely sincere.
And very sorry to hear about your friend.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1362077791152459783?s=20
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1362401825777979394?s=20
I'm not sure he'll make it to the primetime.
If people really go for it, it would feed on itself. It could become a regular topic of conversation alongside the usual of house prices, football, the weather and schools.
"How much have you got?"
"Did you see the rate on the latest tranche?"
"I've heard they'll be funding abc. About time."
"Just wish you were allowed more than £X."
Etc.
I'm not saying it's bound to work brilliantly, maybe it would flop, but I can definitely see the potential. Raise serious funds. Cut out middlemen. Help small savers. Create a collective sense of can-do and collaboration between government and people.
But then, I’ve always found Edinburgh very friendly as well.
interesting article here
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/14/politicians-keep-manifesto-promises
Which is fortunate for me given the Nazarenes tried to kill him. (Luke 4:29)
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1362415229355905028?s=20
If you don't speak to anyone.
Or look and act like a tourist.
Or dawdle generally.
I didn’t get to Bethlehem, although I did get within long sight of it. I was politely advised by the Israeli immigration officials that if I went into the West Bank as a single man travelling alone they would assume I was a terrorist and respond accordingly.
Sure, subsidise saving if you wish - and make the case for that. But don't pretend that it's a way to sort out the government finances, or an attractive way for government to fund investment, as it isn't.
What Starmer appears to be suggesting is a Potemkin Bond.
I'd say Newcastle-Upon-Tyne is the friendliest place I've been to in the UK.
We did not get lynched.
https://twitter.com/XLilliputian/status/1362423874227437571
However, there's no chance of me voting for him to implement it, and I'm exactly the sort of person who should not be benefiting from a Labour manifesto. I therefore conclude he's either given up on recovering the voters lost under his immediate predecessors and is pivoting even further towards the middle classes, or he's lost his mind.
Still, at least he tried.
The most important thing was that Boris knew he knew nothing about it, so delegated and kept well clear.
I can't remember the names of those Dunchurch Courses, but I suspect I did the same ones. One exercise was the "fume tubes" manufacturing game.
It might have been called "Business Skills". Really quite good.
In this case though it isn't just Comedy Dave, Fake News CNN put this bullshit out.
My wife's booked for her 2nd dose next week.
That is mega good news.
(NSFW language)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=SUZyNLZZjMs
We saw it with the FT bullshit about COVID moonshot testing costs, when in a similar vein their journalist didn't read the tender documents properly and just saw COVID, testing, mega bucks....resulting in firstly their nonsense piece and then within 24hrs pretty much every other newspaper reporting it as fact.