And Uber's model of charging more than a traditional taxi firm in peak times but less in non-peak times is masterful. It incentivises the public to smooth out demand, which can only be better for cab drivers.
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
On topic, the email from the Tories doesn't surprise me. The Labour membership database was also woefully out of date - don't forget that for a long time the only real way to quit the party was to stop paying your subs. That meant a database with a whole load of lapsed "members".
I stopped being CLP secretary in something like 2018, quit the party in 2019 and yet was still receiving post addressed to me as CLP Secretary in 2020. Post containing cheques with affiliation fees from trade unions!
Well, these new houses in Aberdeenshire have got to be paid for somehow! (You do realise that at least until independence it is not difficult to be extradited back to England?)_
Which reminds me, I'm spending three days in Aberdeen in the summer, any decent places to visit, also any decent restaurants.
My previous trips were limited to the Malmaison.
Can't really help I'm afraid. Even before Covid there had been absolute carnage in the Aberdeen restaurant industry as the oil money dried up and many of the best places had closed. God knows what it will be like now. The Rustico used to be a nice Italian but whether it will have survived lockdown who can say?
Aberdeen is a pale shadow of the place it used to be when hotel rooms were very hard to find because the oil companies would have block bookings just in case people came onshore unexpectedly.
Cheers, that's a shame about Aberdeen.
Aberdeen Art Gallery reopens at the end of April (it went through a lengthy and expensive renovation and only opened for a few months before Covid struck so I haven’t seen the new look). It’s got a good collection, even a couple of my pals in there.
Kafka used to be the place for expensive designer tat, just 200m from the art gallery (everything’s pretty close in Aberdeen city centre).
I’ve just picked a complete set of Fred Hohler’s magnus opus on oil paintings in public ownership in 84 volumes. Looking forward to the Scottish books as I understand their collections are almost as good as Hartlepool’s.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
There's no way Costa are making a loss on the £4 I spent on a takeaway hot chocolate the other day. I'm still reeling.
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
I don't understand the wider business model of Uber.
Uber's business model was based on price low, drive out the competition and then raise prices to something closer to the actual cost of providing the journey. Attached to that was the hope that automated driving was an 80/20 problem that would be rapidly resolved and the expensive running cost of drivers would disappear - at which point Uber would be the leader in a capital intensive business with high barriers to entry.
Sadly Automated Driving is a 99.9999/0.00001 especially in the places where taxis operate so they are now a taxi company that have set price levels that will never allow them to make a profit.
However the initial dream has allowed a lot of venture capitalists to make money provided they've extracted some money by now.
The liabilities clocked up on the back of the Supreme Court decision that their drivers are workers entitled to minimum wage, holidays and sick pay must be truly horrendous and the cost implications going forward are significant. All in all it is going to make a serious dent in their cash pile.
That was arguably one of the more important decisions by the Court in recent years, albeit they confirmed much of what they had said 10 years earlier in the Autoclenz case. It is the best answer to the gig economy problems to date and will hopefully shake down a lot of abusive "self employment" into actual employment. If you are going to bear the costs of having employees you may as well have the disciplinary rights and control that comes with it.
There’s an even bigger case brewing for Uber against HMRC. The government are arguing that the cab fare -paid to Uber directly and not the driver - should be VATable.
The case is something like four years old at this point, so a final ruling against them leaves a VAT bill of more than a billion pounds.
How the hell has that taken 4 years? Given that the money is paid to Uber and not the driver I really don't see the start of a defence. In the meantime how many local taxi companies have been destroyed by this unfair competition not meeting its obligations? Bah.
Uber were arguing that the money was really being paid to the independent contractor, who was earning below the VAT registration limit - and if they were over that limit, it was their problem to deal with HMRC.
Despite Uber setting independently the price the customer paid and the amount paid to the driver, and Uber themselves handling the payment through their app and bank account. Which is in contrast to other minicab models, where either the driver keeps the fare and rents the car, or the company employs the driver and pays VAT where applicable.
(It’s a little reminiscent of the credit card restaurant tips issue from a few years ago)
Uber were on thin ice already with the HMRC decision, before the recent ruling on drivers being workers. They probably now have no chance of avoiding the VAT man.
My guess is that if the VAT decision goes against them, they’ll wind up their British company and start a new one, which will lead to more court cases against other Uber entities around the world.
Its worth remembering the 21 June pledge isn't for social distancing to end either.
The 21 June step, as written on Sky's ad-break is: "All legal limits on social contact removed. Social distancing, facemasks and working from home reviewed".
What's the difference between a legal limit on social contact and social distancing?
I assume that’s related to rule of 6 / mixing indoors etc
I know the u3a, the WI and the like are working on the assumption that meetings in public halls will have to be socially distanced in the Autumn. What, I wonder, will that do, if correct, for the economics of such halls? If, as I say, that's correct.
One of our local halls ( the one with theatre provision) has closed and the politics have become quite nasty. Despite all the staff being made redundant the charity has run out of money, but local groups are up in arms - they have zero understanding of on costs / reopening costs, legal duties for charities or health and safety, and expect everything back as it was before!!!
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
Strong similarities but not exactly the same. Brexit is the UK withdrawing from a large and powerful supranational organization to which it had surrendered a degree of sovereignty in exchange for economic benefits and a bigger voice on the world stage. Sindy would create a new nation state. Or rather recreate an old one. In fact 2 new nation states. Scotland and RUK.
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
It's good for the customer if you work out it would be more expensive to pay for a phone contract and the subscription service separately, which it was for me the time before last.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
I don't understand the wider business model of Uber.
Uber's business model was based on price low, drive out the competition and then raise prices to something closer to the actual cost of providing the journey. Attached to that was the hope that automated driving was an 80/20 problem that would be rapidly resolved and the expensive running cost of drivers would disappear - at which point Uber would be the leader in a capital intensive business with high barriers to entry.
Sadly Automated Driving is a 99.9999/0.00001 especially in the places where taxis operate so they are now a taxi company that have set price levels that will never allow them to make a profit.
However the initial dream has allowed a lot of venture capitalists to make money provided they've extracted some money by now.
The liabilities clocked up on the back of the Supreme Court decision that their drivers are workers entitled to minimum wage, holidays and sick pay must be truly horrendous and the cost implications going forward are significant. All in all it is going to make a serious dent in their cash pile.
That was arguably one of the more important decisions by the Court in recent years, albeit they confirmed much of what they had said 10 years earlier in the Autoclenz case. It is the best answer to the gig economy problems to date and will hopefully shake down a lot of abusive "self employment" into actual employment. If you are going to bear the costs of having employees you may as well have the disciplinary rights and control that comes with it.
They should/would have known such a court case was coming, for years. If they failed to put any contingency in place then I wouldn't hesitate to call them incompetent.
There is a very big difference from having contingencies on a balance sheet (if they did) and writing cheques. The former is a book entry, the latter concerns the bank and those from whom credit is going to be sought.
The challenge for most of the drivers is going to be vouching their claims and showing how many hours they worked for their pittance. Most will not have adequate records but the risk from the company's perspective is that they get bogged down with mountains of crap trying to sort out what is valid and what is not.
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
It's good for the customer if you work out it would be more expensive to pay for a phone contract and the subscription service separately, which it was for me the time before last.
All of which are way more expensive than simply buying a phone and a SIM-only contract, plus any marketing offers like music subscriptions.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
I don't understand the wider business model of Uber.
Uber's business model was based on price low, drive out the competition and then raise prices to something closer to the actual cost of providing the journey. Attached to that was the hope that automated driving was an 80/20 problem that would be rapidly resolved and the expensive running cost of drivers would disappear - at which point Uber would be the leader in a capital intensive business with high barriers to entry.
Sadly Automated Driving is a 99.9999/0.00001 especially in the places where taxis operate so they are now a taxi company that have set price levels that will never allow them to make a profit.
However the initial dream has allowed a lot of venture capitalists to make money provided they've extracted some money by now.
The liabilities clocked up on the back of the Supreme Court decision that their drivers are workers entitled to minimum wage, holidays and sick pay must be truly horrendous and the cost implications going forward are significant. All in all it is going to make a serious dent in their cash pile.
That was arguably one of the more important decisions by the Court in recent years, albeit they confirmed much of what they had said 10 years earlier in the Autoclenz case. It is the best answer to the gig economy problems to date and will hopefully shake down a lot of abusive "self employment" into actual employment. If you are going to bear the costs of having employees you may as well have the disciplinary rights and control that comes with it.
The killer for Uber isn't employment costs it's VAT.
You usually pay taxi drivers directly and as they don't earn £85,000 a year they don't charge VAT.
Uber passengers don't however pay the driver directly, they pay Uber. And because these people are now workers and not drivers Uber should be charging VAT at 20% on all the rides.
Which is an ongoing court case at the moment over I think £2bn+/
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
I don't understand the wider business model of Uber.
Uber's business model was based on price low, drive out the competition and then raise prices to something closer to the actual cost of providing the journey. Attached to that was the hope that automated driving was an 80/20 problem that would be rapidly resolved and the expensive running cost of drivers would disappear - at which point Uber would be the leader in a capital intensive business with high barriers to entry.
Sadly Automated Driving is a 99.9999/0.00001 especially in the places where taxis operate so they are now a taxi company that have set price levels that will never allow them to make a profit.
However the initial dream has allowed a lot of venture capitalists to make money provided they've extracted some money by now.
The liabilities clocked up on the back of the Supreme Court decision that their drivers are workers entitled to minimum wage, holidays and sick pay must be truly horrendous and the cost implications going forward are significant. All in all it is going to make a serious dent in their cash pile.
That was arguably one of the more important decisions by the Court in recent years, albeit they confirmed much of what they had said 10 years earlier in the Autoclenz case. It is the best answer to the gig economy problems to date and will hopefully shake down a lot of abusive "self employment" into actual employment. If you are going to bear the costs of having employees you may as well have the disciplinary rights and control that comes with it.
The killer for Uber isn't employment costs it's VAT.
You usually pay taxi drivers directly and as they don't earn £85,000 a year they don't charge VAT.
Uber passengers don't however pay the driver directly, they pay Uber. And because these people are now workers and not drivers Uber should be charging VAT at 20% on all the rides.
Which is an ongoing court case at the moment over I think £2bn+/
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
There's no reason deliveries need to be lossmaking.
The UK's largest delivery company surely is Domino's and if you look at Domino's profits and share price over the past twenty years they have not done badly at all.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
It's good for the customer if you work out it would be more expensive to pay for a phone contract and the subscription service separately, which it was for me the time before last.
All of which are way more expensive than simply buying a phone and a SIM-only contract, plus any marketing offers like music subscriptions.
Nope. I always buy SIM-only but it was still cheaper to get the subscription service included with the SIM-only plan.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
It's convenience but I suspect you are paying at least 50% more than I do for the same meal.
Also round here the best takeaways don't go near any of them...
That may be true, but I have tried many restaurants that I'd have never tried without it.
When you find one you like you can always get a menu and a phone number from them to use subsequently if its cheaper.
Ringing a restaurant or takeaway is always an awful experience. Tons of background noise, half the time the person answering the phone can barely speak English, and they will ultimately get your order wrong.
Ordering on an app and getting a receipt is a 1000% better user experience.
I tend to order on JustEat and then collect rather than faff around with delivery, although I will use a restaurant or takeaway's own user interface online if it's good.
Yes, I see the sense of the app.
I just get a bleak vision of the economy of the future. People sitting on sofas, browsing mobiles, ordering junk food, delivered by gig workers with no rights.
I want a future with hoverboards and silver clothes with no pockets. A future with ambition.
If you have no pockets in your silver clothes, where will you keep your vaccine passport?
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
It's convenience but I suspect you are paying at least 50% more than I do for the same meal.
Also round here the best takeaways don't go near any of them...
That may be true, but I have tried many restaurants that I'd have never tried without it.
When you find one you like you can always get a menu and a phone number from them to use subsequently if its cheaper.
Ringing a restaurant or takeaway is always an awful experience. Tons of background noise, half the time the person answering the phone can barely speak English, and they will ultimately get your order wrong.
Ordering on an app and getting a receipt is a 1000% better user experience.
I tend to order on JustEat and then collect rather than faff around with delivery, although I will use a restaurant or takeaway's own user interface online if it's good.
Yes, I see the sense of the app.
I just get a bleak vision of the economy of the future. People sitting on sofas, browsing mobiles, ordering junk food, delivered by gig workers with no rights.
I want a future with hoverboards and silver clothes with no pockets. A future with ambition.
If you have no pockets in your silver clothes, where will you keep your vaccine passport?
And Uber's model of charging more than a traditional taxi firm in peak times but less in non-peak times is masterful. It incentivises the public to smooth out demand, which can only be better for cab drivers.
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
I agree. But if the commercials of the model are predicated on the unfair exploitation of labour it needs a tweak.
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
It's good for the customer if you work out it would be more expensive to pay for a phone contract and the subscription service separately, which it was for me the time before last.
All of which are way more expensive than simply buying a phone and a SIM-only contract, plus any marketing offers like music subscriptions.
Nope. I always buy SIM-only but it was still cheaper to get the subscription service included with the SIM-only plan.
Okay, fairy nuff. I’m clearly out of date when it comes to UK SIM deals.
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
It's good for the customer if you work out it would be more expensive to pay for a phone contract and the subscription service separately, which it was for me the time before last.
If you do that carefully you might save money now, but an awful lot of people don't crunch the numbers. Even then you may only being saving money initially, as the likes of EE are relying on you sticking with them long term because you don't want to lose your "free" Apple Music, Netflix, or whatever. To really save money you need to be willing to give up their perks and switch contract as soon as you are overpaying, not many people do that, which is why so many companies like this type of service bundling.
And Uber's model of charging more than a traditional taxi firm in peak times but less in non-peak times is masterful. It incentivises the public to smooth out demand, which can only be better for cab drivers.
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
I agree. But if the commercials of the model are predicated on the unfair exploitation of labour it needs a tweak.
I don't disagree. There's certainly a middle ground.
Maybe this sums it up:
Traditional taxi firms focussed too much on profit and not enough on customer experience. Uber focussed too much on customer experience and not enough on profit.
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
It's good for the customer if you work out it would be more expensive to pay for a phone contract and the subscription service separately, which it was for me the time before last.
All of which are way more expensive than simply buying a phone and a SIM-only contract, plus any marketing offers like music subscriptions.
Nope. I always buy SIM-only but it was still cheaper to get the subscription service included with the SIM-only plan.
Okay, fairy nuff. I’m clearly out of date when it comes to UK SIM deals.
Of course it depends. I have high standards and I know which networks have good network coverage in the areas I tend to frequent, so some deals were "cheaper" but would be objectively worse.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
I don't understand the wider business model of Uber.
Uber's business model was based on price low, drive out the competition and then raise prices to something closer to the actual cost of providing the journey. Attached to that was the hope that automated driving was an 80/20 problem that would be rapidly resolved and the expensive running cost of drivers would disappear - at which point Uber would be the leader in a capital intensive business with high barriers to entry.
Sadly Automated Driving is a 99.9999/0.00001 especially in the places where taxis operate so they are now a taxi company that have set price levels that will never allow them to make a profit.
However the initial dream has allowed a lot of venture capitalists to make money provided they've extracted some money by now.
The liabilities clocked up on the back of the Supreme Court decision that their drivers are workers entitled to minimum wage, holidays and sick pay must be truly horrendous and the cost implications going forward are significant. All in all it is going to make a serious dent in their cash pile.
That was arguably one of the more important decisions by the Court in recent years, albeit they confirmed much of what they had said 10 years earlier in the Autoclenz case. It is the best answer to the gig economy problems to date and will hopefully shake down a lot of abusive "self employment" into actual employment. If you are going to bear the costs of having employees you may as well have the disciplinary rights and control that comes with it.
There’s an even bigger case brewing for Uber against HMRC. The government are arguing that the cab fare -paid to Uber directly and not the driver - should be VATable.
The case is something like four years old at this point, so a final ruling against them leaves a VAT bill of more than a billion pounds.
How the hell has that taken 4 years? Given that the money is paid to Uber and not the driver I really don't see the start of a defence. In the meantime how many local taxi companies have been destroyed by this unfair competition not meeting its obligations? Bah.
The main reason it’s gone on for so long, is that Uber have thrown a huge team of lawyers at the case to challenge every point and appeal every decision, as it suits their wider business model to postpone the final reckoning for as long as possible.
A not-insignificant proportion of their admin costs are dedicated to trying to stop authorities around the world ruling their business model illegal.
I suspect it's not free but "free" and that you are paying for it somewhere in the contract.
I just pay £20 a month for Apple Family (its cheaper when you've got 3 other people all wanting to stream music) and 150gb of photos because someone doesn't bother to delete the bad ones.
Yes it's certainly not free for any normal meaning of the word. You are paying for it, but the main reason companies like EE offer such perks is that they make it much less likely that you will switch contract, which reduces customer churn and limits customer aquisition costs, which can be very considerable. For the customers this stickiness of the contract makes it less likely you will switch to reduce your costs. So it's good for EE and bad for the customer. Companies aren't doing any of this to save you money.
It's good for the customer if you work out it would be more expensive to pay for a phone contract and the subscription service separately, which it was for me the time before last.
All of which are way more expensive than simply buying a phone and a SIM-only contract, plus any marketing offers like music subscriptions.
Not always the case.
I got my phone (Samsung S9+) in a plan a couple of years ago with Sky Mobile when it launched. Not upgraded it since the plan ended, because the phone still works great and I have no reason to upgrade - buying it bundled together saved over a hundred pounds even compared to buying the phone from Samsung direct.
I looked at the price of Sim Only and buying the phone and it was far cheaper to buy the bundle together.
Not looked in a while to see if there's better deals available elsewhere but I pay £10 per month for 10GB, unlimited calls, unlimited texts, with the data rolled over for 3 years if I don't use it all. I have 133 GB in my "piggybank" so won't run out any time soon.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn but I prefer Davey to Starmer and Starmer also has the Labour Party behind him and I trust them less than him
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
It's convenience but I suspect you are paying at least 50% more than I do for the same meal.
Also round here the best takeaways don't go near any of them...
That may be true, but I have tried many restaurants that I'd have never tried without it.
When you find one you like you can always get a menu and a phone number from them to use subsequently if its cheaper.
Ringing a restaurant or takeaway is always an awful experience. Tons of background noise, half the time the person answering the phone can barely speak English, and they will ultimately get your order wrong.
Ordering on an app and getting a receipt is a 1000% better user experience.
I tend to order on JustEat and then collect rather than faff around with delivery, although I will use a restaurant or takeaway's own user interface online if it's good.
Yes, I see the sense of the app.
I just get a bleak vision of the economy of the future. People sitting on sofas, browsing mobiles, ordering junk food, delivered by gig workers with no rights.
I want a future with hoverboards and silver clothes with no pockets. A future with ambition.
If you have no pockets in your silver clothes, where will you keep your vaccine passport?
Clearly in the future people have no possessions. I have seen Star Trek...
And Uber's model of charging more than a traditional taxi firm in peak times but less in non-peak times is masterful. It incentivises the public to smooth out demand, which can only be better for cab drivers.
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
I agree. But if the commercials of the model are predicated on the unfair exploitation of labour it needs a tweak.
I don't disagree. There's certainly a middle ground.
Maybe this sums it up:
Traditional taxi firms focussed too much on profit and not enough on customer experience. Uber focussed too much on customer experience and not enough on profit.
Traditional taxi firms also focused on profit and not enough on driver experience.
It is telling how many mini-cab drivers abandoned the old firms for Uber (and their competitors) - despite the poor pay and conditions at Uber.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
You can support a party without supporting everything they support. I don't and have never supported everything the Liberals/LDs have supported. What I support is the underlying principles of the party, but sometimes the policy that results I may disagree with. The classic balance is Govt control vs freedom and principle vs pragmatism.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
Really?
The correct way to think about delivery would be on a gross profit contribution basis
Assuming you can make another meal without adding kitchen capacity you’ll make a gross margin of around 55% on the food. Assume a local delivery takes 20 mins round trip you are talking a few pounds cost. So you should be making a positive profit contribution (which is why many restaurants offer a 10% discount for takeaway).
It’s more complex that that of course, especially if there is cannibalisation (although you really shouldn’t use that term in the context of the food industry!) but the basic economics works
And Uber's model of charging more than a traditional taxi firm in peak times but less in non-peak times is masterful. It incentivises the public to smooth out demand, which can only be better for cab drivers.
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
I agree. But if the commercials of the model are predicated on the unfair exploitation of labour it needs a tweak.
I don't disagree. There's certainly a middle ground.
Maybe this sums it up:
Traditional taxi firms focussed too much on profit and not enough on customer experience. Uber focussed too much on customer experience and not enough on profit.
I think Uber is a great idea. In fact I think lots of gig economy businesses are great ideas. It's just that where they are not able to both make an adequate financial return and at the same time provide their workers with decent pay and conditions, this for me is a sign that their time has not quite come.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
I don't understand the wider business model of Uber.
Uber's business model was based on price low, drive out the competition and then raise prices to something closer to the actual cost of providing the journey. Attached to that was the hope that automated driving was an 80/20 problem that would be rapidly resolved and the expensive running cost of drivers would disappear - at which point Uber would be the leader in a capital intensive business with high barriers to entry.
Sadly Automated Driving is a 99.9999/0.00001 especially in the places where taxis operate so they are now a taxi company that have set price levels that will never allow them to make a profit.
However the initial dream has allowed a lot of venture capitalists to make money provided they've extracted some money by now.
The liabilities clocked up on the back of the Supreme Court decision that their drivers are workers entitled to minimum wage, holidays and sick pay must be truly horrendous and the cost implications going forward are significant. All in all it is going to make a serious dent in their cash pile.
That was arguably one of the more important decisions by the Court in recent years, albeit they confirmed much of what they had said 10 years earlier in the Autoclenz case. It is the best answer to the gig economy problems to date and will hopefully shake down a lot of abusive "self employment" into actual employment. If you are going to bear the costs of having employees you may as well have the disciplinary rights and control that comes with it.
There’s an even bigger case brewing for Uber against HMRC. The government are arguing that the cab fare -paid to Uber directly and not the driver - should be VATable.
The case is something like four years old at this point, so a final ruling against them leaves a VAT bill of more than a billion pounds.
How the hell has that taken 4 years? Given that the money is paid to Uber and not the driver I really don't see the start of a defence. In the meantime how many local taxi companies have been destroyed by this unfair competition not meeting its obligations? Bah.
Uber were arguing that the money was really being paid to the independent contractor, who was earning below the VAT registration limit - and if they were over that limit, it was their problem to deal with HMRC.
Despite Uber setting independently the price the customer paid and the amount paid to the driver, and Uber themselves handling the payment through their app and bank account. Which is in contrast to other minicab models, where either the driver keeps the fare and rents the car, or the company employs the driver and pays VAT where applicable.
(It’s a little reminiscent of the credit card restaurant tips issue from a few years ago)
Uber were on thin ice already with the HMRC decision, before the recent ruling on drivers being workers. They probably now have no chance of avoiding the VAT man.
My guess is that if the VAT decision goes against them, they’ll wind up their British company and start a new one, which will lead to more court cases against other Uber entities around the world.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn
That is the issue, isn’t it? Anyone who doesn’t actually want to have a sexual relationship with a member of the Labour Left admits Starmer is better than Corbyn. Far better. But that’s a very low bar on its own.
The trick is to be demonstrably better than the Tory leader at the next election. If that’s Johnson that should be possible, but Johnson has been fooling people with great success for years so it isn’t something that will just happen.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
It's convenience but I suspect you are paying at least 50% more than I do for the same meal.
Also round here the best takeaways don't go near any of them...
That may be true, but I have tried many restaurants that I'd have never tried without it.
When you find one you like you can always get a menu and a phone number from them to use subsequently if its cheaper.
Ringing a restaurant or takeaway is always an awful experience. Tons of background noise, half the time the person answering the phone can barely speak English, and they will ultimately get your order wrong.
Ordering on an app and getting a receipt is a 1000% better user experience.
I tend to order on JustEat and then collect rather than faff around with delivery, although I will use a restaurant or takeaway's own user interface online if it's good.
Yes, I see the sense of the app.
I just get a bleak vision of the economy of the future. People sitting on sofas, browsing mobiles, ordering junk food, delivered by gig workers with no rights.
I want a future with hoverboards and silver clothes with no pockets. A future with ambition.
The pizza will come through your window via autonomous drone.
With the @Dura_Ace service, you won't even have to open the window...
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
Strong similarities but not exactly the same. Brexit is the UK withdrawing from a large and powerful supranational organization to which it had surrendered a degree of sovereignty in exchange for economic benefits and a bigger voice on the world stage. Sindy would create a new nation state. Or rather recreate an old one. In fact 2 new nation states. Scotland and RUK.
That’s a distinction without a difference.
The question is does a diminution on sovereign outweigh the economic benefits or not.
That’s why my view is it will be a shame to see Scotland go, but if a majority of Scottish voters want to then so be it
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
It's convenience but I suspect you are paying at least 50% more than I do for the same meal.
Also round here the best takeaways don't go near any of them...
That may be true, but I have tried many restaurants that I'd have never tried without it.
When you find one you like you can always get a menu and a phone number from them to use subsequently if its cheaper.
Ringing a restaurant or takeaway is always an awful experience. Tons of background noise, half the time the person answering the phone can barely speak English, and they will ultimately get your order wrong.
Ordering on an app and getting a receipt is a 1000% better user experience.
I tend to order on JustEat and then collect rather than faff around with delivery, although I will use a restaurant or takeaway's own user interface online if it's good.
Yes, I see the sense of the app.
I just get a bleak vision of the economy of the future. People sitting on sofas, browsing mobiles, ordering junk food, delivered by gig workers with no rights.
I want a future with hoverboards and silver clothes with no pockets. A future with ambition.
The pizza will come through your window via autonomous drone.
Will the drone know that any pineapple pizza should be smacked in the face of the person who ordered it?
And Uber's model of charging more than a traditional taxi firm in peak times but less in non-peak times is masterful. It incentivises the public to smooth out demand, which can only be better for cab drivers.
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
I agree. But if the commercials of the model are predicated on the unfair exploitation of labour it needs a tweak.
I don't disagree. There's certainly a middle ground.
Maybe this sums it up:
Traditional taxi firms focussed too much on profit and not enough on customer experience. Uber focussed too much on customer experience and not enough on profit.
Traditional taxi firms also focused on profit and not enough on driver experience.
It is telling how many mini-cab drivers abandoned the old firms for Uber (and their competitors) - despite the poor pay and conditions at Uber.
Not sure that’s fair... they went where the business was
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn
That is the issue, isn’t it? Anyone who doesn’t actually want to have a sexual relationship with a member of the Labour Left admits Starmer is better than Corbyn. Far better. But that’s a very low bar on its own.
The trick is to be demonstrably better than the Tory leader at the next election. If that’s Johnson that should be possible, but Johnson has been fooling people with great success for years so it isn’t something that will just happen.
The question is whether Starmer is Labour's second Kinnock or a Labour Cameron, the next election most likely to resemble that of 1992 or 2010.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
That’s a negative driver of a view on the demos, yes. I personally subscribe to a more positive approach.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn
That is the issue, isn’t it? Anyone who doesn’t actually want to have a sexual relationship with a member of the Labour Left admits Starmer is better than Corbyn. Far better. But that’s a very low bar on its own.
The trick is to be demonstrably better than the Tory leader at the next election. If that’s Johnson that should be possible, but Johnson has been fooling people with great success for years so it isn’t something that will just happen.
The question is whether Starmer is Labour's second Kinnock or a Labour Cameron, the next election most likely to resemble that of 1992 or 2010.
I don’t think he’ll be a Kinnock. But even if he’s as good as Cameron, the obstacles to reaching no. 10 remain pretty formidable. Assuming no more than ten seats in Scotland - and however well Sarwar does, that at the moment is a safe assumption - it’s difficult to see how he tops 290 in terms of seats.
Every Uber driver I spoke to (and of course you speak to every one because ratings) really liked the autonomy and freedom - being available or not available at any time, plus they get homeward directional fares when they want, etc.
Terms got successively worse the more recently the drivers joined. If they were/are being so exploited why was/is there such a demand to be an uber driver?
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn but I prefer Davey to Starmer and Starmer also has the Labour Party behind him and I trust them less than him
I think Starmer is very good. He has gravitas and a back story that demonstrates success outside the field of politics, something that few leaders in recent years have been able to demonstrate. The problem is still the Labour Party for me. While I detest what the Conservative Party has turned into, I still distrust Labour even more. If we had a system of directly elected PMs or a presidential system I would vote for Starmer, but unless he can convince that he has rooted out the Corbynista nutters I would be very cautious about lending them a vote
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
It's convenience but I suspect you are paying at least 50% more than I do for the same meal.
Also round here the best takeaways don't go near any of them...
That may be true, but I have tried many restaurants that I'd have never tried without it.
When you find one you like you can always get a menu and a phone number from them to use subsequently if its cheaper.
Ringing a restaurant or takeaway is always an awful experience. Tons of background noise, half the time the person answering the phone can barely speak English, and they will ultimately get your order wrong.
Ordering on an app and getting a receipt is a 1000% better user experience.
I tend to order on JustEat and then collect rather than faff around with delivery, although I will use a restaurant or takeaway's own user interface online if it's good.
Yes, I see the sense of the app.
I just get a bleak vision of the economy of the future. People sitting on sofas, browsing mobiles, ordering junk food, delivered by gig workers with no rights.
I want a future with hoverboards and silver clothes with no pockets. A future with ambition.
The pizza will come through your window via autonomous drone.
Will the drone know that any pineapple pizza should be smacked in the face of the person who ordered it?
Pineapple pizza will not be on offer. The AI algorithms that determine your order know you better than you know yourself, based on the past orders by other similar humans in your demographic. We will be in the arena where choice is no longer for humans to make.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
I don't understand the wider business model of Uber.
Uber's business model was based on price low, drive out the competition and then raise prices to something closer to the actual cost of providing the journey. Attached to that was the hope that automated driving was an 80/20 problem that would be rapidly resolved and the expensive running cost of drivers would disappear - at which point Uber would be the leader in a capital intensive business with high barriers to entry.
Sadly Automated Driving is a 99.9999/0.00001 especially in the places where taxis operate so they are now a taxi company that have set price levels that will never allow them to make a profit.
However the initial dream has allowed a lot of venture capitalists to make money provided they've extracted some money by now.
The liabilities clocked up on the back of the Supreme Court decision that their drivers are workers entitled to minimum wage, holidays and sick pay must be truly horrendous and the cost implications going forward are significant. All in all it is going to make a serious dent in their cash pile.
That was arguably one of the more important decisions by the Court in recent years, albeit they confirmed much of what they had said 10 years earlier in the Autoclenz case. It is the best answer to the gig economy problems to date and will hopefully shake down a lot of abusive "self employment" into actual employment. If you are going to bear the costs of having employees you may as well have the disciplinary rights and control that comes with it.
There’s an even bigger case brewing for Uber against HMRC. The government are arguing that the cab fare -paid to Uber directly and not the driver - should be VATable.
The case is something like four years old at this point, so a final ruling against them leaves a VAT bill of more than a billion pounds.
How the hell has that taken 4 years? Given that the money is paid to Uber and not the driver I really don't see the start of a defence. In the meantime how many local taxi companies have been destroyed by this unfair competition not meeting its obligations? Bah.
Uber were arguing that the money was really being paid to the independent contractor, who was earning below the VAT registration limit - and if they were over that limit, it was their problem to deal with HMRC.
Despite Uber setting independently the price the customer paid and the amount paid to the driver, and Uber themselves handling the payment through their app and bank account. Which is in contrast to other minicab models, where either the driver keeps the fare and rents the car, or the company employs the driver and pays VAT where applicable.
(It’s a little reminiscent of the credit card restaurant tips issue from a few years ago)
Uber were on thin ice already with the HMRC decision, before the recent ruling on drivers being workers. They probably now have no chance of avoiding the VAT man.
My guess is that if the VAT decision goes against them, they’ll wind up their British company and start a new one, which will lead to more court cases against other Uber entities around the world.
I doubt they will get away with that
Of course not - in the end. But it would be entirely in keeping with their actions to date, of making governments jump through years of hoops to actually do anything about it.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
It's convenience but I suspect you are paying at least 50% more than I do for the same meal.
Also round here the best takeaways don't go near any of them...
That may be true, but I have tried many restaurants that I'd have never tried without it.
When you find one you like you can always get a menu and a phone number from them to use subsequently if its cheaper.
Ringing a restaurant or takeaway is always an awful experience. Tons of background noise, half the time the person answering the phone can barely speak English, and they will ultimately get your order wrong.
Ordering on an app and getting a receipt is a 1000% better user experience.
I tend to order on JustEat and then collect rather than faff around with delivery, although I will use a restaurant or takeaway's own user interface online if it's good.
Yes, I see the sense of the app.
I just get a bleak vision of the economy of the future. People sitting on sofas, browsing mobiles, ordering junk food, delivered by gig workers with no rights.
I want a future with hoverboards and silver clothes with no pockets. A future with ambition.
The pizza will come through your window via autonomous drone.
With the @Dura_Ace service, you won't even have to open the window...
Milton Keynes already has a robot delivery service. It doesn't fly though, so you'd still have to walk all the way to your garden gate.
Every Uber driver I spoke to (and of course you speak to every one because ratings) really liked the autonomy and freedom - being available or not available at any time, plus they get homeward directional fares when they want, etc.
Terms got successively worse the more recently the drivers joined. If they were/are being so exploited why was/is there such a demand to be an uber driver?
It was, I think different kind of exploitation.
Most cab drivers have stories of corrupt controllers demanding bribes, late or non-payment from cab companies that strategically went bust and re-opened etc etc.
Uber et al offered a shiny interface, prompt payment and terms they, at least *appeared*, to keep. That the terms were shitty is another issue.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn but I prefer Davey to Starmer and Starmer also has the Labour Party behind him and I trust them less than him
Ok. But the left in Labour are toast, trust me.
And if I read you correctly - which I think I do - you are well suited to this new "tough love" manifestation of the party. It's muscular socialism but there's far more muscle than there is socialism. We're talking community spirit, clean & tidy neighborhoods, discipline on the streets, zero tolerance of petty criminality and antisocial behaviour, respect for your elders, for traditional values and customs, no wokeness, and (key) no shame whatsoever in the flag.
That is much more you than the LDs. They are always banging on about "liberties" and outre things like legalizing drugs. Plus they are still obsessed with Europe. Labour have moved on.
If AV comes in for the next GE you really ought to give them - us - some serious consideration for 2nd pref.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn
That is the issue, isn’t it? Anyone who doesn’t actually want to have a sexual relationship with a member of the Labour Left admits Starmer is better than Corbyn. Far better. But that’s a very low bar on its own.
The trick is to be demonstrably better than the Tory leader at the next election. If that’s Johnson that should be possible, but Johnson has been fooling people with great success for years so it isn’t something that will just happen.
The question is whether Starmer is Labour's second Kinnock or a Labour Cameron, the next election most likely to resemble that of 1992 or 2010.
I don’t think he’ll be a Kinnock. But even if he’s as good as Cameron, the obstacles to reaching no. 10 remain pretty formidable. Assuming no more than ten seats in Scotland - and however well Sarwar does, that at the moment is a safe assumption - it’s difficult to see how he tops 290 in terms of seats.
Agreed, he could also be a Wilson who won with a majority of just 4 in 1964 but then Wilson also won 43 Labour seats in Scotland which would now be mostly SNP
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
Thinking that there isn't already Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh (and a fair bit of vice versa) is peak Scotch expertise.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
Really?
The correct way to think about delivery would be on a gross profit contribution basis
Assuming you can make another meal without adding kitchen capacity you’ll make a gross margin of around 55% on the food. Assume a local delivery takes 20 mins round trip you are talking a few pounds cost. So you should be making a positive profit contribution (which is why many restaurants offer a 10% discount for takeaway).
It’s more complex that that of course, especially if there is cannibalisation (although you really shouldn’t use that term in the context of the food industry!) but the basic economics works
A nephew works as a sous-chef for a restaurant which is now takeaway only. They are now apparently more profitable, and at least as busy, as when they had on-site customers.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up. As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
As each nation would be smaller economically and smaller in population and with a smaller military.
France for instance is about level with the UK economically and population wise but would be significantly bigger economically and population wise than England alone as well as every other home nation, so one of the biggest winners of the UK breaking up in global and European politics terms would be France. Russia would also benefit from a weaker, divided British Isles with the UK broken up
Which no doubt is why you voted to Remain in the European Union. Same failed logic.
Yet you abandoned that PDQ. You'll abandon your unionism just as quick if it becomes Tory policy to break up the union.
No, the same logic, we were stronger on the world stage as part of the EU. Only as part of the EU could we be an equal of China, the US and India who will dominate the 21st century. If Brexit was followed by Scexit we would end up not even the equal of France, let alone the equal of the US and China!
I just opposed joining the Euro, however I respected the vote which took place 41 years after the first EEC vote ie a genuine generation.
If Scots in a genuine generation after the 2014 vote vote to leave the UK so be it, I would be disappointed but respect the vote but on the basis that not a penny more of English taxpayers money goes to Scotland too of course.
However indyref2 must not be for at least another generation
Why don't you go and join the Lib Dems. 🤔
As I am a Conservative not a Liberal, I opposed the Euro when the Lib Dems were campaigning for it and I respect the Brexit vote.
However leaving the EU as I said will mean we will not be as strong on the world stage as we would have been as part of that block, particularly in relation to China and the US.
That makes it even more important to keep the UK together, otherwise we will end up weaker than France, let alone the US and China!
I have the sense that you are closer to the Lib Dems than you are to the current Tory leadership, friend HY. Most people are, actually!!!!
No, I support Vaccination Passports!
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
I thought you liked and rated Starmer?
He is better than Corbyn but I prefer Davey to Starmer and Starmer also has the Labour Party behind him and I trust them less than him
I think Starmer is very good. He has gravitas and a back story that demonstrates success outside the field of politics, something that few leaders in recent years have been able to demonstrate. The problem is still the Labour Party for me. While I detest what the Conservative Party has turned into, I still distrust Labour even more. If we had a system of directly elected PMs or a presidential system I would vote for Starmer, but unless he can convince that he has rooted out the Corbynista nutters I would be very cautious about lending them a vote
Yes if we had the US style system there is a strong chance Starmer would be elected President but the Tories would retain control of the Commons
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Separatism isn't based on dislike, its based on a belief in smaller, closer decision making over collective decision making.
Collectivism and pooling is an ideology that has its downsides, that you are such an ardent fan of collectivism that you think individualism can only be based on hatred or disdain simply reflects the hate and disdain in your own heart.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
Thinking that there isn't already Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh (and a fair bit of vice versa) is peak Scotch expertise.
There is but most Glaswegian Nats direct most of their ire to London and southern English Tories, if Scotland ever went independent that would all shift to elitist metropolitan Edinburgh which would run the show.
There is no Edinburgh resentment of Glasgow, just a bit of snooty superiority
Every Uber driver I spoke to (and of course you speak to every one because ratings) really liked the autonomy and freedom - being available or not available at any time, plus they get homeward directional fares when they want, etc.
Terms got successively worse the more recently the drivers joined. If they were/are being so exploited why was/is there such a demand to be an uber driver?
Asymmetric information. Things like cars not properly insured, gross pay that looked good but didn’t add up once the cost of running the car was taken into account etc. Many people did it for a few months or a year, then quit when they understood the true costs.
For a few people, working only a small number of peak hours a week for a supplementary income, it was probably okay for earning slightly above minimum wage. For everyone else, not so much.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Recent experience suggests option B is preferred...
Edit - btw, thank you for the comment. Really interesting to see the inside track on this.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
That’s a negative driver of a view on the demos, yes. I personally subscribe to a more positive approach.
It isn't necessarily a negative view of the demos per se, just those who are obsessive separatists/ leavers. There will be a number of people in the latter group (and some who express views on here) who have perfectly good and rational reasons for holding their opinion, though they have to live with the fact that a very large number of people who share that ambition do so out of a motivation that is rather less pleasant.
My positive view is that younger people are far less likely to be motivated by hatred of the foreigner, so thankfully the hatred that drips from the likes of Farage and Salmond is less likely to be absorbed by the younger generations.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
Thinking that there isn't already Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh (and a fair bit of vice versa) is peak Scotch expertise.
The novels of (Glaswegian) novelist John Buchan contain many sly digs at Edinburgh - and he died 81 years ago!
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Separatism isn't based on dislike, its based on a belief in smaller, closer decision making over collective decision making.
Collectivism and pooling is an ideology that has its downsides, that you are such an ardent fan of collectivism that you think individualism can only be based on hatred or disdain simply reflects the hate and disdain in your own heart.
Whenever I have to refer to the idiot fringe of those that support Leave (rather than the more rational) you pop up and prove my point.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Would it make sense for the UK to invest in this unilaterally?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
I suspect the EU won't actually do anything useful - any attempt to build fabs in within the EU will lead to years of arguments over where they should be built and who is subsiding them.
I do wonder if the UK are paying any attention at all on working how to get some of those plants in a globally focussed country with little chance of natural disaster or regional wars.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Separatism isn't based on dislike, its based on a belief in smaller, closer decision making over collective decision making.
Collectivism and pooling is an ideology that has its downsides, that you are such an ardent fan of collectivism that you think individualism can only be based on hatred or disdain simply reflects the hate and disdain in your own heart.
Whenever I have to refer to the idiot fringe of those that support Leave (rather than the more rational) you pop up and prove my point.
You just prove my own point with your own language. Your entire philosophy is one of hatred. You hate and can't understand those that are different to you.
I believe in individualism more than collectivism. I think we're better off making our own decisions than deferring to a collective. That you can not understand such a philosophy, that you think collectivism is the only solution, is weak and small minded.
I on the other hand have no hate for Scotland or European nations. I just think they're better off making their own decisions and we are better off making our own.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Excellent post, and yet more proof that there is an expert in nearly everything hanging around PB.
Hopefully an opportunity for the UK, as large companies look at how the EU are treating pharmaceutical companies in an emergency. Would you out your $2bn of capital into a place where your output is threatened with confiscation when it’s most needed?
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
Thinking that there isn't already Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh (and a fair bit of vice versa) is peak Scotch expertise.
He didn't say that, I think he was suggesting that it would be further amplified.
Of course as he isn't Scottish you believe from your Little Scotlander perspective that he shouldn't be allowed an opinion, and once again prove my point about the essential small minded nature of nationalists.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
Thinking that there isn't already Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh (and a fair bit of vice versa) is peak Scotch expertise.
There is but most Glaswegian Nats direct most of their ire to London and southern English Tories, if Scotland ever went independent that would all shift to elitist metropolitan Edinburgh which would run the show.
There is no Edinburgh resentment of Glasgow, just a bit of snooty superiority
I've only lived in both places, but whatever.
I see fantasising about Holyrood sending in the troops to Glasgow will be your post indy catnip.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Recent experience suggests option B is preferred...
Edit - btw, thank you for the comment. Really interesting to see the inside track on this.
My pleasure ... I have learned such a lot from all the contributors on PB over the years, who have such a wide range of expertise and experience. Happy to do my little bit to share whatever professional knowledge I have (as well as the occasional personal opinion ;-)
And Uber's model of charging more than a traditional taxi firm in peak times but less in non-peak times is masterful. It incentivises the public to smooth out demand, which can only be better for cab drivers.
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
I agree. But if the commercials of the model are predicated on the unfair exploitation of labour it needs a tweak.
I don't disagree. There's certainly a middle ground.
Maybe this sums it up:
Traditional taxi firms focussed too much on profit and not enough on customer experience. Uber focussed too much on customer experience and not enough on profit.
Traditional taxi firms also focused on profit and not enough on driver experience.
It is telling how many mini-cab drivers abandoned the old firms for Uber (and their competitors) - despite the poor pay and conditions at Uber.
Not sure that’s fair... they went where the business was
I'm sure that there was an element of that. But the mini-cab business has long been full of bottom feeders and scumbags.
Some might say that Uber just took the business plan and went international with it.
Every Uber driver I spoke to (and of course you speak to every one because ratings) really liked the autonomy and freedom - being available or not available at any time, plus they get homeward directional fares when they want, etc.
Terms got successively worse the more recently the drivers joined. If they were/are being so exploited why was/is there such a demand to be an uber driver?
Asymmetric information. Things like cars not properly insured, gross pay that looked good but didn’t add up once the cost of running the car was taken into account etc. Many people did it for a few months or a year, then quit when they understood the true costs.
For a few people, working only a small number of peak hours a week for a supplementary income, it was probably okay for earning slightly above minimum wage. For everyone else, not so much.
Hmm interesting. Not my impression in the UK but then I didn't ask for three years report & accounts...
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Separatism isn't based on dislike, its based on a belief in smaller, closer decision making over collective decision making.
Collectivism and pooling is an ideology that has its downsides, that you are such an ardent fan of collectivism that you think individualism can only be based on hatred or disdain simply reflects the hate and disdain in your own heart.
Whenever I have to refer to the idiot fringe of those that support Leave (rather than the more rational) you pop up and prove my point.
You just prove my own point with your own language. Your entire philosophy is one of hatred. You hate and can't understand those that are different to you.
I believe in individualism more than collectivism. I think we're better off making our own decisions than deferring to a collective. That you can not understand such a philosophy, that you think collectivism is the only solution, is weak and small minded.
I on the other hand have no hate for Scotland or European nations. I just think they're better off making their own decisions and we are better off making our own.
Once again you are talking bollox. I don't hate anyone, least of all a pip squeak such as yourself, though I allow myself the indulgence of laughing at your pathetic attempts to sound as though you have given thought to your simple minded prejudice. As for the robust language I use , I only reserve it for prejudiced and ill-informed idiots such as yourself who are rude to others on this platform. I think most others will find I am polite if they are also, whatever their views.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
There's no reason deliveries need to be lossmaking.
The UK's largest delivery company surely is Domino's and if you look at Domino's profits and share price over the past twenty years they have not done badly at all.
Dominos is a pizza company that also delivers the pizza.
The delivery part doesn't make domino's any money. The pizza makes the money.
Deliveroo is attempting to take the delivery part of that business. The bit that doesn't make money.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
Thinking that there isn't already Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh (and a fair bit of vice versa) is peak Scotch expertise.
The novels of (Glaswegian) novelist John Buchan contain many sly digs at Edinburgh - and he died 81 years ago!
Buchan is an interesting case, almost your archetypal conservative Unionist but with an extremely strong sense of his Scottishness. That spirit seems to be completely extinct in the current Tory party.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
There's no reason deliveries need to be lossmaking.
The UK's largest delivery company surely is Domino's and if you look at Domino's profits and share price over the past twenty years they have not done badly at all.
Dominos is a pizza company that also delivers the pizza.
The delivery part doesn't make domino's any money. The pizza makes the money.
Deliveroo is attempting to take the delivery part of that business. The bit that doesn't make money.
Yep! They’re taking not making money, and scaling it up.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
Really?
The correct way to think about delivery would be on a gross profit contribution basis
Assuming you can make another meal without adding kitchen capacity you’ll make a gross margin of around 55% on the food. Assume a local delivery takes 20 mins round trip you are talking a few pounds cost. So you should be making a positive profit contribution (which is why many restaurants offer a 10% discount for takeaway).
It’s more complex that that of course, especially if there is cannibalisation (although you really shouldn’t use that term in the context of the food industry!) but the basic economics works
A nephew works as a sous-chef for a restaurant which is now takeaway only. They are now apparently more profitable, and at least as busy, as when they had on-site customers.
The indian restaurant near me was 90% eat in 10% take away prior to pandemic. They now do far more turnover just doing takeaways. In fact to get a takeaway from there on a Saturday night you have to book it by Thursday at the latest or you will not get one.
Every Uber driver I spoke to (and of course you speak to every one because ratings) really liked the autonomy and freedom - being available or not available at any time, plus they get homeward directional fares when they want, etc.
Terms got successively worse the more recently the drivers joined. If they were/are being so exploited why was/is there such a demand to be an uber driver?
Haven't you answered your own question? It was good at first.....
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
Strong similarities but not exactly the same. Brexit is the UK withdrawing from a large and powerful supranational organization to which it had surrendered a degree of sovereignty in exchange for economic benefits and a bigger voice on the world stage. Sindy would create a new nation state. Or rather recreate an old one. In fact 2 new nation states. Scotland and RUK.
That’s a distinction without a difference.
The question is does a diminution on sovereign outweigh the economic benefits or not.
That’s why my view is it will be a shame to see Scotland go, but if a majority of Scottish voters want to then so be it
Of course it isn't a "distinction without a difference". It's a distinction with a difference.
In or out of the EU, the UK is a sovereign nation state. Scotland within the UK is not a sovereign nation state. This difference is real and meaningful unless the concept of "sovereign nation state" itself is unreal and meaningless. Which is clearly not the case except for the most far-out of globalist utopians (of which you are not one).
Thing is, Charles, you are one of those on here who have a slight tendency to roll out trite, faux-authoritative "sayings" in lieu of thinking. You don't always, I hasten to add, but now and again you do. And you've done it here.
All the bad tempered arguments over Brexit, who did and did not vote for it, and its effects are primarily a symptom rather than a cause of the malaise.
Brexit was and is a Little Englander project that will lead to the break up of the Union.
This was known before the vote.
And still the fanbois cheer.
How can 17 million people be little Englanders? This is the level of analysis of a 12 year old. Why don't you stick to posting other people's tweets.
If you think me questioning your intelligence and insulting you is unlikely to change your mind, then perhaps your approach might not work on Brexit supporters.
The project was driven by Little Englanders - they recruited a large number of the gullible and discontented.
I note you haven't adressed @Scott_xP's point. Brexit is going to destroy the union.
No its not. Black_Rook hit the nail on the head before, the union was destroyed by devolution.
Its only a matter of time now. Brexit is coincidental to it. There's no solution to the West Lothian Question still, half a century after it was asked and the forces against the union now are ratchetting one way.
The union will end. Brexit isn't why.
Utter rubbish, the Union will not end.
We Tories will refuse a legal indyref2 under all circumstances for starters.
However I do agree in my local party at least a majority of Tories support an English Parliament within the UK now
I don’t mean this in an inflammatory way. But why do you care so much? If there’s a popular majority for independence in what was a historically sovereign nation, who are you to stand on the way? It’s also a somewhat counterproductive position to take if I may say so.
As I am a diehard Unionist and we will each be weaker if the Union breaks up.
As our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain showed separatist nationalist governments trying to undermine the unity of the state can be ignored
We know you are a diehard unionist HYUFD, but why?. Why will each be weaker?
I am not saying I disagree with you. I don't have a view as I don't have enough information, so I am ambivalent and I am happy for those with more at stake to decide.
But being a Unionist is an opinion not a fact. Being English or Scottish is a fact; you can't change it. Being a Unionist or Separatist is an opinion. Why do you have this opinion? Why will the two parts be weaker?
The argument is exactly the same for the EU
There are economic benefits from being together. There is some pooling of sovereign. The question is do the benefits of the former outweigh the second / or is there a Scottish or a UK demos.
The problem is that the vast majority of separatists don't view it this way. Their motivation is primarily driven by dislike, disdain or even hatred of people they don't consider part of the group they identify with. Problem is, that much like the excellent satire in The Life of Brian, they then move on to dislike, disdain or hatred of a further subgroup once they achieve their initial objective.
Indeed, even if Scotland got independence it would soon develop into Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh much as post Brexit there is still resentment in Northern England of London and the South
Thinking that there isn't already Glasgow resentment of Edinburgh (and a fair bit of vice versa) is peak Scotch expertise.
He didn't say that, I think he was suggesting that it would be further amplified.
Of course as he isn't Scottish you believe from your Little Scotlander perspective that he shouldn't be allowed an opinion, and once again prove my point about the essential small minded nature of nationalists.
You seem a bit confused, nowhere have I ever stated people shouldn't be allowed an opinion, just that in many cases that they're very much not worth listening to.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
Really?
The correct way to think about delivery would be on a gross profit contribution basis
Assuming you can make another meal without adding kitchen capacity you’ll make a gross margin of around 55% on the food. Assume a local delivery takes 20 mins round trip you are talking a few pounds cost. So you should be making a positive profit contribution (which is why many restaurants offer a 10% discount for takeaway).
It’s more complex that that of course, especially if there is cannibalisation (although you really shouldn’t use that term in the context of the food industry!) but the basic economics works
A nephew works as a sous-chef for a restaurant which is now takeaway only. They are now apparently more profitable, and at least as busy, as when they had on-site customers.
Is that because some of the staff are furloughed though?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Money is not really the issue, although the costs involved are huge, it's people. Semiconductor process engineers are an exotic breed, and all the good ones work for TSMC, Intel and Samsung. And even those companies will sometimes be unequal to the challenge, as Intel has demonstrated recently.
Since the UK has a close security relationship with the US it's probably best to leave the manufacturing to them and concentrate on what we do well, which is semi design.
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
There's no reason deliveries need to be lossmaking.
The UK's largest delivery company surely is Domino's and if you look at Domino's profits and share price over the past twenty years they have not done badly at all.
Dominos is a pizza company that also delivers the pizza.
The delivery part doesn't make domino's any money. The pizza makes the money.
Deliveroo is attempting to take the delivery part of that business. The bit that doesn't make money.
That's just not true, without the deliveries the pizzas wouldn't be sold. They only sell the pizzas because they're getting delivered. So yes absolutely the deliveries do make money, even if they load the cost onto the pizza - the asymmetric costs of having a pizza delivered versus collecting it show just how much you're being charged for that delivery too.
Amazon too is a delivery company essentially. Are you suggesting they don't make money?
Deliveroo's model absolutely can work. The question is getting the pricing right, but there is clearly value-added in getting things delivered to people's homes and that can be turned into a profit as Amazon and Domino's have done.
Its noteworthy that Just-Eat prices have adjusted in recent years. I had a delivery last night, we were charged a 50p platform fee, plus £2.99 delivery fee, plus the cost of the food which was clearly inflated and Just Eat take ~30% of that. There's no reason that can't be profitable.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Would it make sense for the UK to invest in this unilaterally?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
Wasn't our chip-maker ...... somewhere in Cambridge IIRC ...... sold off some time ago?
I missed the previous Sunak thread but on its topic I'm not seeing anything that makes me question my bet. I'm letting my bet ride to the end (in one part because I don't know how to lay it off without putting £5000 in cash into Betfair considering it wasn't a Betfair bet to begin with), but I don't see anything in those texts that would cause Sunak to be fired from being Chancellor. I don't see anything there that will be significant for the next leadership election with MPs nominating or the membership vote either. So I don't see how its a factor.
I suspect Sunak's fate will be far more tied to whether and how the UK economy bounces back from Covid than anything to do with texts with Dave.
Greensill didn't get the loans they were after - so I'm at a loss as to why it's even vaguely a story. Sunak's emails are the exact thing you do to move an issue elsewhere
Indeed. Former minister lobbies current minister isn’t exactly a story.
Company employing former minister gets preferential treatment would have been; but the preferential treatment they hoped to get by employing the former minister never arrived.
It’s not really a huge story in itself.
However, it isn’t just a “former minister”, it’s a former prime minister, who I naively assumed would be above such things.
Can’t he swan off to the middle east to advocate for peace or something?
Like you I feel that this is more than a little grubby for an ex PM and it does not reflect well on him, whether it worked or not.
Dave (pbuh) doesn't have a sleazy bone in his body, I know he's turned down several jobs/directorships with firms because he didn't think it would be proper.
This story is an example of Dave being nice and helpful to people he knows.
He turned down several directorships and took Greensill Capital? Did he not ask George?
George has had a hectic private life in recent years, getting divorced, getting a new fiancée, knocking her up.
Just to make it even more exciting, Thea Rogers is Chief Customer Experience Offer at Deliveroo, which had a bit of a disaster recently with their IPO.
People are asking whose bright idea it was to spam the users of the App and their email and encourage the customers to invest in Deliveroo.
There is not a single part of the Deliveroo / Just Eat or Uber Eats business model that makes any actual sense. It's a combination of doing everything and anything to pretend their delivery workers aren't employees attached to charging takeaways 30% to attract customers too lazy to pick up the phone.
Its not about laziness remotely. That's an insane suggestion and is like suggesting that Amazon's business is about attracting customs too lazy to pick up the phone. Or anyone else that has an online website.
The ability to browse dozens of restaurants, pick one, browse their menu and then place an order all on one site makes great sense.
But the traditional takeaway model runs their delivery service at a loss (or break even at best) to attract business. Deliveroo is attempting to dominate and own a loss making business.
It is utterly nuts. It shows how abysmally capital is being allocated at the moment.
There's no reason deliveries need to be lossmaking.
The UK's largest delivery company surely is Domino's and if you look at Domino's profits and share price over the past twenty years they have not done badly at all.
Dominos is a pizza company that also delivers the pizza.
The delivery part doesn't make domino's any money. The pizza makes the money.
Deliveroo is attempting to take the delivery part of that business. The bit that doesn't make money.
Yep! They’re taking not making money, and scaling it up.
Like Amazon did for years.
I remember all the talk about how Amazon was a flawed model because they were making losses or extremely moderate profits for years despite the share price surging. Then from ~2016 onwards profit lifted off dramatically.
Would it make sense for the UK to invest in this unilaterally?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
If the UK wanted to be serious it would need to commit to a long term investment in semis i.e. decades. You can't do this half-heartedly. $10B for a fab is the tip of the iceberg and these things can't be done standalone - you need all the surrounding infrastructure, eco-systems, R&D, etc, etc.). The UK could do worse than look at what South Korea and Taiwan did in the 1980s and 1990s to kick start their semis industries.
TSMC recently suggested $100B CAPEX and R&D over the next 3 years, which is probably on the high side for a short term investment plan (but they know what they are doing).
For a serious, long term UK program, start with a fund of $100B for the first 5-year plan and go from there.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Would it make sense for the UK to invest in this unilaterally?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
Wasn't our chip-maker ...... somewhere in Cambridge IIRC ...... sold off some time ago?
ARM are a chip/architecture designer I think, rather than a chip-maker.
Every Uber driver I spoke to (and of course you speak to every one because ratings) really liked the autonomy and freedom - being available or not available at any time, plus they get homeward directional fares when they want, etc.
Terms got successively worse the more recently the drivers joined. If they were/are being so exploited why was/is there such a demand to be an uber driver?
Haven't you answered your own question? It was good at first.....
Yes but the ones I speak to who joined more recently are still there...
Would it make sense for the UK to invest in this unilaterally?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
If the UK wanted to be serious it would need to commit to a long term investment in semis i.e. decades. You can't do this half-heartedly. $10B for a fab is the tip of the iceberg and these things can't be done standalone - you need all the surrounding infrastructure, eco-systems, R&D, etc, etc.). The UK could do worse than look at what South Korea and Taiwan did in the 1980s and 1990s to kick start their semis industries.
TSMC recently suggested $100B CAPEX and R&D over the next 3 years, which is probably on the high side for a short term investment plan (but they know what they are doing).
For a serious, long term UK program, start with a fund of $100B for the first 5-year plan and go from there.
So it would probably end up costing even more than Trident, at least at first.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Would it make sense for the UK to invest in this unilaterally?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
Wasn't our chip-maker ...... somewhere in Cambridge IIRC ...... sold off some time ago?
ARM are a chip/architecture designer I think, rather than a chip-maker.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
I suspect the EU won't actually do anything useful - any attempt to build fabs in within the EU will lead to years of arguments over where they should be built and who is subsiding them.
I do wonder if the UK are paying any attention at all on working how to get some of those plants in a globally focussed country with little chance of natural disaster or regional wars.
Intel recently announced large extra investment in their plant in Ireland.
Spotify all the way. With the Good Stuff recorded onto MiniDisc so that I have a hard copy.
MiniDisc is great, if you don't actually care about sound quality...
I used to have a mini disc player in my car: better quality than tape and the discs are smaller. Also, in a car sound quality is less of an issue...
Minidisc sound quality is good - Sony ATRAC compression (especially type-S on later models) is very good compared to a lot of the lossy formats out there which are newer. Besides which I have tinnitus so I do not need audiophile 24bit quality.
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
My day job is as a semis / electronics industry analyst. I've never seen a shortage like this one in over 30 years because it is so multi-faceted.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
Excellent post, and yet more proof that there is an expert in nearly everything hanging around PB.
Hopefully an opportunity for the UK, as large companies look at how the EU are treating pharmaceutical companies in an emergency. Would you out your $2bn of capital into a place where your output is threatened with confiscation when it’s most needed?
Agreed - it's great to get comments form people who actually know what they're taking about (as opposed to me).
I'm not sure how much of an opportunity it might be for the UK, though. Key equipment suppliers (Dutch ASML) are, as @ridaligo points out European - and Intel already has a very large presence in S. Ireland. We have minimal manufacturing in any part of the supply chain, so it would take some pretty big incentives to get any of the large manufacturers to locate here.
As for political supply risk, Taiwan is a great deal worse than the EU...
Comments
The fact is that Uber is/was massively ahead of its time. It really did "disrupt" the taxi industry for the better.
(Fred gave them to my Dad originally)
Despite Uber setting independently the price the customer paid and the amount paid to the driver, and Uber themselves handling the payment through their app and bank account. Which is in contrast to other minicab models, where either the driver keeps the fare and rents the car, or the company employs the driver and pays VAT where applicable.
(It’s a little reminiscent of the credit card restaurant tips issue from a few years ago)
Uber were on thin ice already with the HMRC decision, before the recent ruling on drivers being workers. They probably now have no chance of avoiding the VAT man.
My guess is that if the VAT decision goes against them, they’ll wind up their British company and start a new one, which will lead to more court cases against other Uber entities around the world.
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Tech/Semiconductors/MacBook-and-iPad-production-delayed-as-supply-crunch-hits-Apple
Just hope China doesn't do anything silly with Taiwan.
The UK's largest delivery company surely is Domino's and if you look at Domino's profits and share price over the past twenty years they have not done badly at all.
I did however support the Coalition from 2010 to 2015 when it included Ed Davey, if we had AV LDs would probably be my second preference at present
Weird you view so much through the prism of immigration, more so than most leavers.
Huzzah
Maybe this sums it up:
Traditional taxi firms focussed too much on profit and not enough on customer experience.
Uber focussed too much on customer experience and not enough on profit.
A not-insignificant proportion of their admin costs are dedicated to trying to stop authorities around the world ruling their business model illegal.
I got my phone (Samsung S9+) in a plan a couple of years ago with Sky Mobile when it launched. Not upgraded it since the plan ended, because the phone still works great and I have no reason to upgrade - buying it bundled together saved over a hundred pounds even compared to buying the phone from Samsung direct.
I looked at the price of Sim Only and buying the phone and it was far cheaper to buy the bundle together.
Not looked in a while to see if there's better deals available elsewhere but I pay £10 per month for 10GB, unlimited calls, unlimited texts, with the data rolled over for 3 years if I don't use it all. I have 133 GB in my "piggybank" so won't run out any time soon.
It is telling how many mini-cab drivers abandoned the old firms for Uber (and their competitors) - despite the poor pay and conditions at Uber.
The correct way to think about delivery would be on a gross profit contribution basis
Assuming you can make another meal without adding kitchen capacity you’ll make a gross margin of around 55% on the food. Assume a local delivery takes 20 mins round trip you are talking a few pounds cost. So you should be making a positive profit contribution (which is why many restaurants offer a 10% discount for takeaway).
It’s more complex that that of course, especially if there is cannibalisation (although you really shouldn’t use that term in the context of the food industry!) but the basic economics works
The trick is to be demonstrably better than the Tory leader at the next election. If that’s Johnson that should be possible, but Johnson has been fooling people with great success for years so it isn’t something that will just happen.
With the @Dura_Ace service, you won't even have to open the window...
The question is does a diminution on sovereign outweigh the economic benefits or not.
That’s why my view is it will be a shame to see Scotland go, but if a majority of Scottish voters want to then so be it
Terms got successively worse the more recently the drivers joined. If they were/are being so exploited why was/is there such a demand to be an uber driver?
Most cab drivers have stories of corrupt controllers demanding bribes, late or non-payment from cab companies that strategically went bust and re-opened etc etc.
Uber et al offered a shiny interface, prompt payment and terms they, at least *appeared*, to keep. That the terms were shitty is another issue.
And if I read you correctly - which I think I do - you are well suited to this new "tough love" manifestation of the party. It's muscular socialism but there's far more muscle than there is socialism. We're talking community spirit, clean & tidy neighborhoods, discipline on the streets, zero tolerance of petty criminality and antisocial behaviour, respect for your elders, for traditional values and customs, no wokeness, and (key) no shame whatsoever in the flag.
That is much more you than the LDs. They are always banging on about "liberties" and outre things like legalizing drugs. Plus they are still obsessed with Europe. Labour have moved on.
If AV comes in for the next GE you really ought to give them - us - some serious consideration for 2nd pref.
Collectivism and pooling is an ideology that has its downsides, that you are such an ardent fan of collectivism that you think individualism can only be based on hatred or disdain simply reflects the hate and disdain in your own heart.
On the supply side it's not just leading edge foundry capacity that is tight; 8 inch legacy capacity is also fully booked. And in packaging, assembly and test, as well as tight capacity, there are also shortages of raw materials (lead frames, PCBs for advanced packaging, etc). We've also had the Texas freeze shutting down Samsung, Infineon and NXP fabs for a month and a fire at Renesas in Japan also shutting it down for a few weeks.
On the demand side, in addition to covid-related demand from hyperscalers (cloud servers and storage) and work/study from home PCs/Chromebooks, we also have the rapid migration to 5G smartphones (>500m units this year) and the rebound in automotive (including the shift to EV). 5G and EV need LOTS more chips per system for functions like RF and Power Management.
So, this situation isn't getting better any time soon - despite increased CAPEX now, it's takes a couple of years to bring a new fab up to full production. Wafer and chip ASPs are up significantly in 1Q and lead-times are out to a year for some chips. Double and triple ordering is rife. This situation will continue through 2021 and get gradually eased in 2022. The semis market will grow 20% this year, much of the revenue growth fueled by chip price rises.
The US is seriously worried (belatedly) about the national security implications of all this - i.e. the reliance on TSMC in Taiwan to build the world's semiconductors and the ambitions of China to develop it's own or "acquire" the technology it needs to build a competing technology roadmap over the next decade or two. EUV is the jewel in the crown here - without that, China will struggle to go head to head with TSMC, Samsung/SK hynix and Intel.
Hence the money being showered on Intel and TSMC by Biden to build fabs in Arizona ... this is about national security ("techo-nationalism" if you like). The globalized supply chain is going to be re-engineered, at least to some degree.
The interesting play here is the EU ... which way does it jump? Does it align with the US camp or cosy up to China? ASML (the only EUV supplier) is of course a European company ...
There is no Edinburgh resentment of Glasgow, just a bit of snooty superiority
For a few people, working only a small number of peak hours a week for a supplementary income, it was probably okay for earning slightly above minimum wage. For everyone else, not so much.
Edit - btw, thank you for the comment. Really interesting to see the inside track on this.
My positive view is that younger people are far less likely to be motivated by hatred of the foreigner, so thankfully the hatred that drips from the likes of Farage and Salmond is less likely to be absorbed by the younger generations.
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
I do wonder if the UK are paying any attention at all on working how to get some of those plants in a globally focussed country with little chance of natural disaster or regional wars.
I believe in individualism more than collectivism. I think we're better off making our own decisions than deferring to a collective. That you can not understand such a philosophy, that you think collectivism is the only solution, is weak and small minded.
I on the other hand have no hate for Scotland or European nations. I just think they're better off making their own decisions and we are better off making our own.
Hopefully an opportunity for the UK, as large companies look at how the EU are treating pharmaceutical companies in an emergency. Would you out your $2bn of capital into a place where your output is threatened with confiscation when it’s most needed?
Of course as he isn't Scottish you believe from your Little Scotlander perspective that he shouldn't be allowed an opinion, and once again prove my point about the essential small minded nature of nationalists.
I see fantasising about Holyrood sending in the troops to Glasgow will be your post indy catnip.
I am now hoping that they don’t bat as abjectly as the did last time they faced Jamie Overton...
Some might say that Uber just took the business plan and went international with it.
The delivery part doesn't make domino's any money. The pizza makes the money.
Deliveroo is attempting to take the delivery part of that business. The bit that doesn't make money.
In or out of the EU, the UK is a sovereign nation state. Scotland within the UK is not a sovereign nation state. This difference is real and meaningful unless the concept of "sovereign nation state" itself is unreal and meaningless. Which is clearly not the case except for the most far-out of globalist utopians (of which you are not one).
Thing is, Charles, you are one of those on here who have a slight tendency to roll out trite, faux-authoritative "sayings" in lieu of thinking. You don't always, I hasten to add, but now and again you do. And you've done it here.
You, for example.
Since the UK has a close security relationship with the US it's probably best to leave the manufacturing to them and concentrate on what we do well, which is semi design.
Amazon too is a delivery company essentially. Are you suggesting they don't make money?
Deliveroo's model absolutely can work. The question is getting the pricing right, but there is clearly value-added in getting things delivered to people's homes and that can be turned into a profit as Amazon and Domino's have done.
Its noteworthy that Just-Eat prices have adjusted in recent years. I had a delivery last night, we were charged a 50p platform fee, plus £2.99 delivery fee, plus the cost of the food which was clearly inflated and Just Eat take ~30% of that. There's no reason that can't be profitable.
I remember all the talk about how Amazon was a flawed model because they were making losses or extremely moderate profits for years despite the share price surging. Then from ~2016 onwards profit lifted off dramatically.
Would it make sense for the UK to invest in this unilaterally?
How much would it cost to become a leading chipmaker domestically? And given the national security implications if we were to contrast that with eg the cost of Trident how would it compare?
Having a domestic supply of chips seems like it could be a national security issue and an infinitely more useful thing economically than Trident.
If the UK wanted to be serious it would need to commit to a long term investment in semis i.e. decades. You can't do this half-heartedly. $10B for a fab is the tip of the iceberg and these things can't be done standalone - you need all the surrounding infrastructure, eco-systems, R&D, etc, etc.). The UK could do worse than look at what South Korea and Taiwan did in the 1980s and 1990s to kick start their semis industries.
TSMC recently suggested $100B CAPEX and R&D over the next 3 years, which is probably on the high side for a short term investment plan (but they know what they are doing).
For a serious, long term UK program, start with a fund of $100B for the first 5-year plan and go from there.
I could be wrong.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56660823
(*) Must start as a billionaire.
I'm not sure how much of an opportunity it might be for the UK, though.
Key equipment suppliers (Dutch ASML) are, as @ridaligo points out European - and Intel already has a very large presence in S. Ireland. We have minimal manufacturing in any part of the supply chain, so it would take some pretty big incentives to get any of the large manufacturers to locate here.
As for political supply risk, Taiwan is a great deal worse than the EU...