America is going to chip in $14bm dollars a year ? Firstly why inst it the EUs responsibility and secondly Joe says a lot but the Paddies are screaming he's fking Ireland with his tax reforms. Oh and at present hes flying to the UK but not stopping off to admire the 40 shades of green.
As I ve said to you before Irish America is dying. Theres no flow of immigration across the Atlantic to make it worth chasing votes all the hypenated Americans worth chasing are Latino or Asian and the Dems will soon drop the Irish and send them off to MAGA land.
The US pays a shedload more a year to keep Israel safe. And the Jewish vote in the US is far, far smaller than the Irish-American one. Being the US President with the beaming face standing behind the Irish and British leaders as the articles of unification are signed will carry huge political dividends.
:Last time I looked Israel was doing a lot of Americas work in the ME. Ireland usually takes a neutral or anti US posture in most things. Joe wont be signing anything in the near future, nobody wants to pay the bills.
Unification is around 20 years away if that polling you linked to is right, so Joe is very unlikely to live to see it. We might, though, if we are lucky.
I’d be hard pressed to imagine what the state of the world will be like in 20 years time - as fair as I’m concerned, Brexit could have been considered a roaring success (unlikely, but I would never have imagined living through a pandemic...)
I will be delighted to be on the planet in 20 years to be fair
I'd say it was a certainty unless you are being blasted off in a rocket
Correct diagnosis, wrong prescription. A border poll would open old wounds, you only have to look at the Brexit ref on a much more esoteric issue.
The GFA was ostensibly a big pile of fudge to buy time until demographic trends inevitably lead to reunification. It needs another big dollop of fudge to put everyone in a sugar coma until the same point in time.
Absolutely. I think the idea in the NI protocol that NI Government can routinely reject the current deal is a good one but it is uneven. If a more generous deal was introduced, but all sides could routinely reject it. So if the EU are worried that quasi EU status erodes their EU single market or standards, or if GB sees the NI route as being key to cross border crime or illegal immigration, or if NI don't feel the other 2 are respecting the agreement. At the moment the EU sees itself seperate from Ireland and therefore not responsible for any mutual collapse - Brexit caused this and because they didn't want it they can't accept it. Only when they do will a solution be found.
The solution to NI has always been a pile of fudge, and the solution to the current impasse will be no different.
The EU does need to let Ireland deal with it though, the UK and RoI were quietly working on the required fudge before Varadkar and Barnier decided to change tack and use the border as a negotiating point.
I wonder what's driving the growth in support for Alliance. I must say, I can think of almost nothing on which I would find myself in agreement with that party, being left wing, fervently pro-EU, and very woke.
Perhaps those things are quite popular there?
After all, what else is the choice? Sectarian hard left and hard right parties in SF, DUP and TUV, and fairly soft left Nationalism in the SDLP.?
If you want a non-sectarian party in tune with the modern world, then it is hard to see past the Alliance Party.
Obviously, there's a constituency that such things appeal to, and not a lot of choice on offer. But, they're essentially, the equivalent of the left wing of the Liberal Democrats/Greens in terms of English politics. I could see the appeal in a constituency like South Belfast, but not so much in a place like North Down.
The Republic has moved on a lot from it's inward looking Catholic conservatism of 50 years ago. It has become a country much more in tune with modern liberal ideas, on abortion, gay rights etc. There is still a Craggy Island element, but fading fast. I am sure that there is a significant element in NI that wants to modernise too, and get away from pre-enlightenment sectarianism too.
In short, the changes in the Republic, politically and economically over recent decades, mean that reunification is more appealing.
Indeed. Just in economic terms, the Republic is prosperous and Northern Ireland a basket case. (Be careful though because Ireland's reported GDP is exaggerated by tax-dodging multinationals with balance sheets but not jobs there. It is still ahead of the moribund North though.) With Ireland's greater social liberalism and economic prosperity, reunification might be a harder sell in the South.
The beauty of the GFA is that none of this really mattered. Thanks, Boris.
America is going to chip in $14bm dollars a year ? Firstly why inst it the EUs responsibility and secondly Joe says a lot but the Paddies are screaming he's fking Ireland with his tax reforms. Oh and at present hes flying to the UK but not stopping off to admire the 40 shades of green.
As I ve said to you before Irish America is dying. Theres no flow of immigration across the Atlantic to make it worth chasing votes all the hypenated Americans worth chasing are Latino or Asian and the Dems will soon drop the Irish and send them off to MAGA land.
The US pays a shedload more a year to keep Israel safe. And the Jewish vote in the US is far, far smaller than the Irish-American one. Being the US President with the beaming face standing behind the Irish and British leaders as the articles of unification are signed will carry huge political dividends.
:Last time I looked Israel was doing a lot of Americas work in the ME. Ireland usually takes a neutral or anti US posture in most things. Joe wont be signing anything in the near future, nobody wants to pay the bills.
Unification is around 20 years away if that polling you linked to is right, so Joe is very unlikely to live to see it. We might, though, if we are lucky.
Well Im 60 this summer and all my life Ive been told its 10 years to an all island state and it hasnt happened yet. And until someone cracks the economics I still cant see it happening more so since this is a time when all governments has blown the budget and have no largesse to throw around.
Your premise is based on Northerners voting for a 25+% cut in their standard of living and the RoI voting to bankrupt itself. I cant see that happening personally.
At one stage in my life I employed a Ulsterman as a manager. Nice chap; told me once that his father had, back when the Ulster Covenant was signed, signed it with his own blood. Met my chap's brother once, who, at a wedding where I'd been invited, as The Boss, to put in an appearance told me angrily that ALL the Trouble.... this was mid 70's...... was the fault of the Catholics.
I'm firmly of the opinion that the Irish Question is up there with that of Schleswig-Holstein.
Enjoyable piece as always from David - I especially like the concept of Schroedinger's Province.
The difficulty is that, although people in GB are as David says largely indifferent to events in NI, people in NI are largely indifferent to the priorities of the UK government. Compared with maintaining peace in NI, Brexit is a very secondary issue for NI voters. Therefore, the proposal to revise the GFA in order to make Brexit work better is explosive, because of the perception that this *might* reignite the Troubles. And that's before you think how the US Congress would react.
Moreover, there is a third way which almost certainly commands popular consent ("support" would overstate it) in NI, which is to make NI a de facto associate member of the EU with close links to Eire, but still independent of Eire. And that's exactly what's happened. In everything that matters in everyday life (trade, cross-border movement), NI is effectively in the EU. And yes, it creates a border in the Irish Sea for trade purposes, but the inconveniences caused by that are minor compared with a real border between NI and Eire, because for now the UK and EU have the same regulations, so there isn't much to check.
Is it logical? No. Is it durable? For a while, until UK and EU legislation differ so much that the Irish Sea border needs to start checking seriously whether, for instance, genetically-engineered food is crossing. Perhaps by then, there will be a wider consensus for Irish unity, or some other solution. But as a pragmatic solution for now, it works, and that's what matters to most people.
PS And yes, it means Johnson lied when he said there wouldn't be an Irish Sea border. But supporting the Conservatives these days requires a certain insouciance about truth.
It's only one poll, and tough to extrapolate to Hartlepool even if it is right, but if these sorts of shifts are happening in the Red Wall then the Tories should win the by-election modestly comfortably. I think the odds are about right, but if anything I'd say the Tories are slightly underrated by them.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
He was strongly pro Corbyn and voted for him as leader, but had a wobble as polls showed the party consistently languishing and he joined the likes of Toynbee in musing aloud that perhaps a change of leadership was (sadly) necessary to avoid a bad GE defeat. When the early election was called, however, he rallied around and put everything into it. He was, as we all were on the left, surprised and delighted by the result. After this, fueled both by conviction and a tinge of guilt for his public doubting, he became one of Corbyn's most passionate and effective outriders. But still not totally uncritically. He was, for example, strong on antisemitism being a real issue not a purely confected one.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's only one poll, and tough to extrapolate to Hartlepool even if it is right, but if these sorts of shifts are happening in the Red Wall then the Tories should win the by-election modestly comfortably. I think the odds are about right, but if anything I'd say the Tories are slightly underrated by them.
I agree. Labour need to drift more to be anything like value imo.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's only one poll, and tough to extrapolate to Hartlepool even if it is right, but if these sorts of shifts are happening in the Red Wall then the Tories should win the by-election modestly comfortably. I think the odds are about right, but if anything I'd say the Tories are slightly underrated by them.
Yet Survation last night gives Labour a huge lead of 50% to 33% in the North which would see Hartlepool comfortably stay red and just a 1% Tory lead across GB, so depends which poll you believe
All the problems that have flown from the Brexit referendum have been because it should have been a referendum on English independence from the UK.
An English vote for independence from the UK in 2016 would have achieved everything the Brexit referendum achieved, but without the problems in NI because Unionism would be done, and without the uncertainty over Scotland's future - I'm opposed to a border dividing the island of Britain, but at least the question would have been settled.
It wouldn't, loyalists in Antrim etc would declare UDI rather than accept direct rule from Dublin
What would they use for currency? Who would pay their pensions?
Enjoyable piece as always from David - I especially like the concept of Schroedinger's Province.
The difficulty is that, although people in GB are as David says largely indifferent to events in NI, people in NI are largely indifferent to the priorities of the UK government. Compared with maintaining peace in NI, Brexit is a very secondary issue for NI voters. Therefore, the proposal to revise the GFA in order to make Brexit work better is explosive, because of the perception that this *might* reignite the Troubles. And that's before you think how the US Congress would react.
Moreover, there is a third way which almost certainly commands popular consent ("support" would overstate it) in NI, which is to make NI a de facto associate member of the EU with close links to Eire, but still independent of Eire. And that's exactly what's happened. In everything that matters in everyday life (trade, cross-border movement), NI is effectively in the EU. And yes, it creates a border in the Irish Sea for trade purposes, but the inconveniences caused by that are minor compared with a real border between NI and Eire, because for now the UK and EU have the same regulations, so there isn't much to check.
Is it logical? No. Is it durable? For a while, until UK and EU legislation differ so much that the Irish Sea border needs to start checking seriously whether, for instance, genetically-engineered food is crossing. Perhaps by then, there will be a wider consensus for Irish unity, or some other solution. But as a pragmatic solution for now, it works, and that's what matters to most people.
PS And yes, it means Johnson lied when he said there wouldn't be an Irish Sea border. But supporting the Conservatives these days requires a certain insouciance about truth.
All true. Also worth stepping back a moment and considering what "the proposal to revise the GFA in order to make Brexit work better" means. England voted for Brexit and then for this largely unworkable "solution" after Brexit. That it absolutely screws NI doesn't bother the people of England.
So what is the likely required solution? "the proposal to revise the GFA in order to make Brexit work better" - in other words England forces NI to do something it didn't vote for that makes it highly likely that a significant number of people there will get violently angry.
A "United" Kingdom that forces one nation's will upon another not even caring how disastrous it will be on the other nation who voted NOT to do this? Well, do I need to say more? It isn't the NI/GB border that isn't logical or durable, its the UK.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's only one poll, and tough to extrapolate to Hartlepool even if it is right, but if these sorts of shifts are happening in the Red Wall then the Tories should win the by-election modestly comfortably. I think the odds are about right, but if anything I'd say the Tories are slightly underrated by them.
Yet Survation last night gives Labour a huge lead of 50% to 33% in the North which would see Hartlepool comfortably stay red and just a 1% Tory lead across GB, so depends which poll you believe
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
All the problems that have flown from the Brexit referendum have been because it should have been a referendum on English independence from the UK.
An English vote for independence from the UK in 2016 would have achieved everything the Brexit referendum achieved, but without the problems in NI because Unionism would be done, and without the uncertainty over Scotland's future - I'm opposed to a border dividing the island of Britain, but at least the question would have been settled.
It wouldn't, loyalists in Antrim etc would declare UDI rather than accept direct rule from Dublin
What would they use for currency? Who would pay their pensions?
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
"Labour is on course to lose dozens of seats in Red Wall councils to the Conservatives next week, according to a poll in the party’s former heartlands.
The Tories are likely to win majorities in key marginals including Dudley, Northumberland and Derby and increase their number of seats in Red Wall areas by a third, a YouGov survey for The Times has found. The Conservatives are also likely to be the largest party in Bolton." {£}
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's only one poll, and tough to extrapolate to Hartlepool even if it is right, but if these sorts of shifts are happening in the Red Wall then the Tories should win the by-election modestly comfortably. I think the odds are about right, but if anything I'd say the Tories are slightly underrated by them.
Yet Survation last night gives Labour a huge lead of 50% to 33% in the North which would see Hartlepool comfortably stay red and just a 1% Tory lead across GB, so depends which poll you believe
Thanks to Hyufd for posting the link. I think it's an outlier (the actual Con//Lab difference is negligible - 1 single respondent) but trends are always interesting, It's noticeable that the slump in Tory popularity in this sample looks overwhelmingly due to a change in view about Johnson. 14% of 2019 Conservative voters strongly disapprove of him; nearly all of these have switched to a different party.
It will be interesting if the video widely circulating this morning of Sir Keir eating, drinking and chatting indoors with a large amount of staffers will have any effect on voters.
At worst it could be his Cummings moment with one rule for them and another for us. But just as likely it’s seen as an intrusive bit of filming and no one really cares since the relaxing of the lockdown rules.
Incredibly fast moving like a military operation. This GP surgery is doing a thousand people today, went in and didn't stop moving until had to wait here for ten minutes as I'm driving.
No side effects. Where can I go now to buy a Zune?
Pleased for you.
I had no side effects from either of my doses. So hope the same for you. 🤞
"Labour is on course to lose dozens of seats in Red Wall councils to the Conservatives next week, according to a poll in the party’s former heartlands.
The Tories are likely to win majorities in key marginals including Dudley, Northumberland and Derby and increase their number of seats in Red Wall areas by a third, a YouGov survey for The Times has found. The Conservatives are also likely to be the largest party in Bolton." {£}
For betting purposes, it's worth noting that this is relatively old YouGov data, cumulating subsamples from ranging from April 14 to 28. It seems credible that the Tories are making progress in the Red Wall area, but this method of sampling, like a constituency poll, doesn't necessarily reflect the demographic mix (because national polls don't try to do that at constituency or regional level) and should be taken with caution.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's not cheap running a revolution in North London, comrade.
Capitalism always wins!
But TBF, if to be an authentic socialist you have to opt out of capitalism in a capitalist society there will not be many authentic socialists. It's a pretty high bar to ask someone to jump. Hence the popularity of this view on the right of politics. It's a bit like if I said that to be an authentic believer in free enterprise and a small state a person had to argue for a liquid market in body parts.
"Labour is on course to lose dozens of seats in Red Wall councils to the Conservatives next week, according to a poll in the party’s former heartlands.
The Tories are likely to win majorities in key marginals including Dudley, Northumberland and Derby and increase their number of seats in Red Wall areas by a third, a YouGov survey for The Times has found. The Conservatives are also likely to be the largest party in Bolton." {£}
For betting purposes, it's worth noting that this is relatively old YouGov data, cumulating subsamples from ranging from April 14 to 28. It seems credible that the Tories are making progress in the Red Wall area, but this method of sampling, like a constituency poll, doesn't necessarily reflect the demographic mix (because national polls don't try to do that at constituency or regional level) and should be taken with caution.
To be honest Nick I think all polls need to be taken with caution, especially with a range of 1-14 lead for the conservatives
The mail is conducting a Boris 'love in' this morning in contrast to their recent anti Boris narratives
I'm predicting a narrow win for Labour in Hartlepool. It's going to be a pivotal moment for Keir Starmer; when in 2034 we look back on his first decade as PM, it's going to be seen as akin to the Adrian Heath equaliser at Oxford, or the Mark Robins goal at Forest in the respective careers of Howard Kendall and Fergie.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's not cheap running a revolution in North London, comrade.
Capitalism always wins!
But TBF, if to be an authentic socialist you have to opt out of capitalism in a capitalist society there will not be many authentic socialists. It's a pretty high bar to ask someone to jump. Hence the popularity of this view on the right of politics. It's a bit like if I said that to be an authentic believer in free enterprise and a small state a person had to argue for a liquid market in body parts.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it!
Incredibly fast moving like a military operation. This GP surgery is doing a thousand people today, went in and didn't stop moving until had to wait here for ten minutes as I'm driving.
No side effects. Where can I go now to buy a Zune?
Awesome, sounds really well organised. The whole process should be much easier to organise, now that we are down to the young and able-bodied.
It was incredibly well organised.
They were asking everyone on arrival if it was first or second dose, overwhelming majority of people were there for their second. So people were able bodied, I'd guess most people there were ~60s with some younger mixed in.
I'm predicting a narrow win for Labour in Hartlepool. It's going to be a pivotal moment for Keir Starmer; when in 2034 we look back on his first decade as PM, it's going to be seen as akin to the Adrian Heath equaliser at Oxford, or the Mark Robbins goal at Forest in the respective careers of Howard Kendall and Fergie.
As you know, I think the seat is going blue, but I hope I'm wrong and you're right. And if you are, I agree with the analogies. It will be a "stop the rot, turn the tide" moment. For me, the Poulter putt late on the Saturday at the 2012 Ryder Cup is what I picture. Trimmed the deficit and set up the platform and momentum for the following day's sweeping European comeback and ultimate victory.
I'm predicting a narrow win for Labour in Hartlepool. It's going to be a pivotal moment for Keir Starmer; when in 2034 we look back on his first decade as PM, it's going to be seen as akin to the Adrian Heath equaliser at Oxford, or the Mark Robbins goal at Forest in the respective careers of Howard Kendall and Fergie.
As you know, I think the seat is going blue, but I hope I'm wrong and you're right. And if you are, I agree with the analogies. It will be a "stop the rot, turn the tide" moment. For me, the Poulter putt late on the Saturday at the 2012 Ryder Cup is what I picture. Trimmed the deficit and set up the platform and momentum for the following day's sweeping European comeback and ultimate victory.
Yes, I sense the tragic cleft that faces you. On the one hand that treasured reputation as a super-forecaster, and on the other the first glimmers of a potential new dawn.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's not cheap running a revolution in North London, comrade.
Capitalism always wins!
But TBF, if to be an authentic socialist you have to opt out of capitalism in a capitalist society there will not be many authentic socialists. It's a pretty high bar to ask someone to jump. Hence the popularity of this view on the right of politics. It's a bit like if I said that to be an authentic believer in free enterprise and a small state a person had to argue for a liquid market in body parts.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it!
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's not cheap running a revolution in North London, comrade.
Capitalism always wins!
But TBF, if to be an authentic socialist you have to opt out of capitalism in a capitalist society there will not be many authentic socialists. It's a pretty high bar to ask someone to jump. Hence the popularity of this view on the right of politics. It's a bit like if I said that to be an authentic believer in free enterprise and a small state a person had to argue for a liquid market in body parts.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it!
In what sense "from it"? You mean kleptocrats like Mugabe etc?
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I wonder what's driving the growth in support for Alliance. I must say, I can think of almost nothing on which I would find myself in agreement with that party, being left wing, fervently pro-EU, and very woke.
Perhaps those things are quite popular there?
After all, what else is the choice? Sectarian hard left and hard right parties in SF, DUP and TUV, and fairly soft left Nationalism in the SDLP.?
If you want a non-sectarian party in tune with the modern world, then it is hard to see past the Alliance Party.
Obviously, there's a constituency that such things appeal to, and not a lot of choice on offer. But, they're essentially, the equivalent of the left wing of the Liberal Democrats/Greens in terms of English politics. I could see the appeal in a constituency like South Belfast, but not so much in a place like North Down.
The Republic has moved on a lot from it's inward looking Catholic conservatism of 50 years ago. It has become a country much more in tune with modern liberal ideas, on abortion, gay rights etc. There is still a Craggy Island element, but fading fast. I am sure that there is a significant element in NI that wants to modernise too, and get away from pre-enlightenment sectarianism too.
In short, the changes in the Republic, politically and economically over recent decades, mean that reunification is more appealing.
Indeed. Just in economic terms, the Republic is prosperous and Northern Ireland a basket case. (Be careful though because Ireland's reported GDP is exaggerated by tax-dodging multinationals with balance sheets but not jobs there. It is still ahead of the moribund North though.) With Ireland's greater social liberalism and economic prosperity, reunification might be a harder sell in the South.
The beauty of the GFA is that none of this really mattered. Thanks, Boris.
It should matter though. These are the issues that really should be front and centre.
On topic David is right, the GFA is a deeply uncomfortable and deeply unsuitable status quo. The only thing is that what came before was much worse.
People are afraid that something worse will return, but we should be seeking something better instead.
I'm predicting a narrow win for Labour in Hartlepool. It's going to be a pivotal moment for Keir Starmer; when in 2034 we look back on his first decade as PM, it's going to be seen as akin to the Adrian Heath equaliser at Oxford, or the Mark Robbins goal at Forest in the respective careers of Howard Kendall and Fergie.
As you know, I think the seat is going blue, but I hope I'm wrong and you're right. And if you are, I agree with the analogies. It will be a "stop the rot, turn the tide" moment. For me, the Poulter putt late on the Saturday at the 2012 Ryder Cup is what I picture. Trimmed the deficit and set up the platform and momentum for the following day's sweeping European comeback and ultimate victory.
Yes, I sense the tragic cleft that faces you. On the one hand that treasured reputation as a super-forecaster, and on the other the first glimmers of a potential new dawn.
- I like to think of it as a win/win. But it's also a lose/lose of course.
Remember how the EU was demanding UK supply of AZ at the height of our pandemic?
Currently, a quarter of AstraZeneca stocks remain unused in France, a figure that could increase as more Pfizer jabs become available. On Friday, Health Minister Olivier Véran said he had asked the French health watchdog to examine whether it would be possible to offer the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to those under 55. Volunteers for the vaccine would be required to sign a release form.
Patrick Vogt, a general practitioner in the city of Mulhouse, said he is desperate for the government to change its recommendations after he was forced to throw away doses of AstraZeneca last week.
“I managed to vaccinate 6 patients in 3 days. The others said they didn’t want to, or wanted to wait for another vaccine,” said Dr. Vogt. “So my vials were going out of date, I had to throw them away.”
After posting a video of himself throwing doses in the bin, Dr. Vogt received dozens of calls from volunteers in their forties who wanted to get a jab — people he is not allowed to vaccinate.
Off-topic but related: let's all praise Liz Truss for the brilliant deal she has signed with the North Sea EEA countries. Fishing communities like here in Aberdeenshire are delighted that they will be able to catch all the fish they were promised...
Or in reality, what an utter farce. So much for the "Truss and the UK are signing brilliant new trade deals!" gift written by the remaining PB Johnsonites. Pretty much the only thing that their version of Brexit has done is delivered the polar opposite of what was promised.
Let's quit the CFP so we can regain sovereignty over our waters! Yay! Except that in practice they have willfully and with total ignorance tied up and shut down the fishing industry.
"But we have a majority of 80 and we're ahead in the polls so who cares" say certain posters. Yes, who cares about things that are actually good for the country, what a ludicrous argument to make...
The frothers on here believe she is next PM as well, how barking can you get.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
I found David's piece very interesting as I do not have a good knowledge of NI
I recently read that the Irish government, in the event of a unification poll, would want to retain NI much as it is with devolved powers guaranteed by a joint Irish-UK Council
I expect we all want a peaceful answer for NI and maybe, as has been said, it needs ladles of 'fudge'
The Unionist community are extremely keen to stay in the union as part of UK.
But what if the union doesn't really exist anymore, which could be soon? Scotland independent.
Many ulster people are of Scots descendent.
Is it a union with England they really want to remain in?
I’d expect NI Unionists would remain umbilically linked to whatever constitutes the UK or rUK, regardless if it was reciprocated.
They literally fetishise their fleg. Are there any anthropologists/psychologists around that can comment on cases of tribes that have easily changed their fetish objects?
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's not cheap running a revolution in North London, comrade.
Capitalism always wins!
But TBF, if to be an authentic socialist you have to opt out of capitalism in a capitalist society there will not be many authentic socialists. It's a pretty high bar to ask someone to jump. Hence the popularity of this view on the right of politics. It's a bit like if I said that to be an authentic believer in free enterprise and a small state a person had to argue for a liquid market in body parts.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it!
Its a tale as old as time.
How many religions have preached about 'charity' and living a life of abstinence etc from cathedrals full of gold?
From what I have heard / hearing the situation in India is utterly dreadful.
Sadly yes. Horrible reports of people fighting over oxygen bottles, and official numbers don’t correspond to what’s being observed on the ground in several cities.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
He said make money "from it" - the "it" being their preaching of socialism. So I assume he means left wing politicos getting rich either from their job or their platform, as opposed to the usual guff that you can't hold authentic left wing views if your finances are healthy.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's not cheap running a revolution in North London, comrade.
Capitalism always wins!
But TBF, if to be an authentic socialist you have to opt out of capitalism in a capitalist society there will not be many authentic socialists. It's a pretty high bar to ask someone to jump. Hence the popularity of this view on the right of politics. It's a bit like if I said that to be an authentic believer in free enterprise and a small state a person had to argue for a liquid market in body parts.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it!
Its a tale as old as time.
How many religions have preached about 'charity' and living a life of abstinence etc from cathedrals full of gold?
America is going to chip in $14bm dollars a year ? Firstly why inst it the EUs responsibility and secondly Joe says a lot but the Paddies are screaming he's fking Ireland with his tax reforms. Oh and at present hes flying to the UK but not stopping off to admire the 40 shades of green.
As I ve said to you before Irish America is dying. Theres no flow of immigration across the Atlantic to make it worth chasing votes all the hypenated Americans worth chasing are Latino or Asian and the Dems will soon drop the Irish and send them off to MAGA land.
The US pays a shedload more a year to keep Israel safe. And the Jewish vote in the US is far, far smaller than the Irish-American one. Being the US President with the beaming face standing behind the Irish and British leaders as the articles of unification are signed will carry huge political dividends.
:Last time I looked Israel was doing a lot of Americas work in the ME. Ireland usually takes a neutral or anti US posture in most things. Joe wont be signing anything in the near future, nobody wants to pay the bills.
Unification is around 20 years away if that polling you linked to is right, so Joe is very unlikely to live to see it. We might, though, if we are lucky.
I’d be hard pressed to imagine what the state of the world will be like in 20 years time - as fair as I’m concerned, Brexit could have been considered a roaring success (unlikely, but I would never have imagined living through a pandemic...)
I will be delighted to be on the planet in 20 years to be fair
I'd say it was a certainty unless you are being blasted off in a rocket
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
He said make money "from it" - the "it" being their preaching of socialism. So I assume he means left wing politicos getting rich either from their job or their platform, as opposed to the usual guff that you can't hold authentic left wing views if your finances are healthy.
I was specifically criticising the likes of Owen Jones and his Patreon account, rather than making any more general point about people with left-wing views.
I have nothing but respect for Nick, although we agree on little politically. We need good people to stand for elected office, and I will always support those who do.
Owen's take on Tory sleaze. His thrust is that Labour risk boring people by focusing on standards in public life and need to inject a fizzy class element - "One rule for them and their rich mates. Another for everyone else."
I forget, did Owen end up supporting Corbyn or not in the end? ISTR he opposed him up to the 2017 election, when Corbyn did alright, then supported him until the 2019 election, which he lost disastrously. When Owen says something, a wise man does the opposite, at least when it comes to winning over Middle England.
The history of Labour since Blair is the party trying to get floating voters fired up about inequality, and the floating voters just not being that interested. Oh, that, and four successive election defeats.
It's not cheap running a revolution in North London, comrade.
Capitalism always wins!
But TBF, if to be an authentic socialist you have to opt out of capitalism in a capitalist society there will not be many authentic socialists. It's a pretty high bar to ask someone to jump. Hence the popularity of this view on the right of politics. It's a bit like if I said that to be an authentic believer in free enterprise and a small state a person had to argue for a liquid market in body parts.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it!
Its a tale as old as time.
How many religions have preached about 'charity' and living a life of abstinence etc from cathedrals full of gold?
Very lyrical. Is that an effect of your jab?
I'm rather jealous of those who've received their jabs at Salisbury Cathedral or Westminster Abbey. Colourless, municipal building in Ealing for me.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
You're being somewhat unfair to Owen Jones. His Patreon channel offers exactly the same content to all subscribers, whether they pay £3 per month or £100. Socialism in action, I'd say. I'd guess most pay £3. And the income is not used to line his own pockets - it's used to hire staff and resources to produce videos, podcasts etc. I'm sure Jones has a healthy income from his journalism and his books, so I'd be astonished if he uses any of the Patreon subscriptions for personal gain.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
He said make money "from it" - the "it" being their preaching of socialism. So I assume he means left wing politicos getting rich either from their job or their platform, as opposed to the usual guff that you can't hold authentic left wing views if your finances are healthy.
I was specifically criticising the likes of Owen Jones and his Patreon account, rather than making any more general point about people with left-wing views.
I have nothing but respect for Nick, although we agree on little politically. We need good people to stand for elected office, and I will always support those who do.
Do we know how he's spending his earnings, though. Has he, for example, forked out for a £200k refurb of his flat?
I dont know if it has been.mentioned on the thread but the Times is reporting that the favourite to succeed ArlenFoster, Edwin Poots, is a Creationist who believes the Earth was formed only 6000 yrs ago...where do these loons come from?
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
Hardly a shattering sum. And what do you want him to do? Either stop knocking capitalism or stop earning decent money?
All the problems that have flown from the Brexit referendum have been because it should have been a referendum on English independence from the UK.
An English vote for independence from the UK in 2016 would have achieved everything the Brexit referendum achieved, but without the problems in NI because Unionism would be done, and without the uncertainty over Scotland's future - I'm opposed to a border dividing the island of Britain, but at least the question would have been settled.
It wouldn't, loyalists in Antrim etc would declare UDI rather than accept direct rule from Dublin
What would they use for currency? Who would pay their pensions?
No sign of they would be banned from using Sterling , have no pensions, would have massive deficit , would starve etc without the English taxpayer paying all their bills. The frothers must be abed.
US press getting louder on the Big Story. I have no doubt it’s getting them clicks but they could presumably have got clicks at any time by plugging this narrative. So why now.
With Trump gone, something else has to satisfy the demand for implausible stories.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
Hardly a shattering sum. And what do you want him to do? Either stop knocking capitalism or stop earning decent money?
More of a problem I think is the fact that for someone like Owen Jones (who love him or loath him is a very articulate and interesting writer and speaker) would take a significant pay cut if he were elected as an MP: not exactly an incentive to get the brightest and best in when many can earn significantly more outside. It’s not a popular opinion, but I think our MPs are badly underpaid for the job we expect them to do. My solution would be to get them to stop pretending to be social workers and concentrate on the legislative role, letting those that want to carry on with their day job. After all we expect the PM to be able to do that job while being an MP so it should be doable for many other jobs as well.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
You're being somewhat unfair to Owen Jones. His Patreon channel offers exactly the same content to all subscribers, whether they pay £3 per month or £100. Socialism in action, I'd say. I'd guess most pay £3. And the income is not used to line his own pockets - it's used to hire staff and resources to produce videos, podcasts etc. I'm sure Jones has a healthy income from his journalism and his books, so I'd be astonished if he uses any of the Patreon subscriptions for personal gain.
Yes, all "tiers" get the same content. So it's 3 quid basically. Glad to see that. Very different to Lozza's offering. There the £100 per month "Top Fox" membership gets you all sorts of perks such as "dinner once a year" with the man himself. How about that eh? Dinner with Laurence Fox once a year. Just imagine the suspense as that day approaches and finally dawns. Making a list of things to talk about. The agonizing over what to wear. Just the whole sense of occasion.
No, Owen is a good guy. The reason people hate him is that he's articulate and effective. Plus his youthful look and motormouth vibe turns some off. But I like him. And if you read/view the actual output you find it's nothing like the crazed lefty of caricature.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
A really good feature of PB is that anyone receiving a vaccination seems to get likes from other posters, even though they may not quite agree with or indeed definitely do not agree with
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
You're being somewhat unfair to Owen Jones. His Patreon channel offers exactly the same content to all subscribers, whether they pay £3 per month or £100. Socialism in action, I'd say. I'd guess most pay £3. And the income is not used to line his own pockets - it's used to hire staff and resources to produce videos, podcasts etc. I'm sure Jones has a healthy income from his journalism and his books, so I'd be astonished if he uses any of the Patreon subscriptions for personal gain.
Yes, all "tiers" get the same content. So it's 3 quid basically. Glad to see that. Very different to Lozza's offering. There the £100 per month "Top Fox" membership gets you all sorts of perks such as "dinner once a year" with the man himself. How about that eh? Dinner with Laurence Fox once a year. Just imagine the suspense as that day approaches and finally dawns. Making a list of things to talk about. The agonizing over what to wear. Just the whole sense of occasion.
No, Owen is a good guy. The reason people hate him is that he's articulate and effective. Plus his youthful look and motormouth vibe turns some off. But I like him. And if you read/view the actual output you find it's nothing like the crazed lefty of caricature.
Frankly, I'd rather dine on my own vomit than have dinner with Laurence Fox.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
You're being somewhat unfair to Owen Jones. His Patreon channel offers exactly the same content to all subscribers, whether they pay £3 per month or £100. Socialism in action, I'd say. I'd guess most pay £3. And the income is not used to line his own pockets - it's used to hire staff and resources to produce videos, podcasts etc. I'm sure Jones has a healthy income from his journalism and his books, so I'd be astonished if he uses any of the Patreon subscriptions for personal gain.
Yes, all "tiers" get the same content. So it's 3 quid basically. Glad to see that. Very different to Lozza's offering. There the £100 per month "Top Fox" membership gets you all sorts of perks such as "dinner once a year" with the man himself. How about that eh? Dinner with Laurence Fox once a year. Just imagine the suspense as that day approaches and finally dawns. Making a list of things to talk about. The agonizing over what to wear. Just the whole sense of occasion.
No, Owen is a good guy. The reason people hate him is that he's articulate and effective. Plus his youthful look and motormouth vibe turns some off. But I like him. And if you read/view the actual output you find it's nothing like the crazed lefty of caricature.
£100 gets you a dinner with Fox. £200 gets you no dinner with Fox.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
Before the referendum there were these options re GFA,NI,RoI:
Remain to win - steady as she goes, but that ship sailed.
or
Brexit to win and:
stay in EEA/join EFTA stay in single market find a technology solution to the border relax EU red lines something like Mrs May's deal RoI to leave EU in parallel with UK NI to decide to join RoI agree to have a border within Ireland.
Neither Brexit nor Remain campaigned on the basis that Brexit was impossible. Most MPs were for remain. But Parliament failed to agree any of the options within its powers. The DUP doesn't support anything at all.
It's time to reconsider red lines, however sacrosanct.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
But what's the point in being independent and sovereign and all that, if we can't go around beating up smaller, crappier countries?
The whole point of Brexit - I thought - was to regain this ability, to invigorate the nation so we could invade, conquer, and plunder other nations, just like in the good old days That's what UKIP promised us, the old Britain, the Britain of the 50s - by which I presumed they meant the 1750s or the 1850s. Surely not the 1950s when all we did was eat suet pudding in the drizzle?!
If we don't go back to the old imperial Britain that tupped the world and gave birth to modernity then I for one think Brexit is pointless, and I want to abandon it
They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
Except we didn't really.
Apart from that...
Lol you clueless idiot. Go back to copying from people who know what they're talking about.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
And Ministers told the fishing industry this, did they? And voters? Or are you saying that they lied?
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
Clear as day once the deal came through, Barnier got bogged down in fish while Frost made out like a bandit on the other issues.
Funnily enough since that happened all those who were saying "who cares about fish, its meaningless" have suddenly started saying "but the fish"
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
As for LPF Britain didn't even get as good a deal on LPF provisions as Canada did. So if this was the game they were playing they played it badly.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
But what's the point in being independent and sovereign and all that, if we can't go around beating up smaller, crappier countries?
The whole point of Brexit - I thought - was to regain this ability, to invigorate the nation so we could invade, conquer, and plunder other nations, just like in the good old days That's what UKIP promised us, the old Britain, the Britain of the 50s - by which I presumed they meant the 1750s or the 1850s. Surely not the 1950s when all we did was eat suet pudding in the drizzle?!
If we don't go back to the old imperial Britain that tupped the world and gave birth to modernity then I for one think Brexit is pointless, and I want to abandon it
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
You're being somewhat unfair to Owen Jones. His Patreon channel offers exactly the same content to all subscribers, whether they pay £3 per month or £100. Socialism in action, I'd say. I'd guess most pay £3. And the income is not used to line his own pockets - it's used to hire staff and resources to produce videos, podcasts etc. I'm sure Jones has a healthy income from his journalism and his books, so I'd be astonished if he uses any of the Patreon subscriptions for personal gain.
Yes, all "tiers" get the same content. So it's 3 quid basically. Glad to see that. Very different to Lozza's offering. There the £100 per month "Top Fox" membership gets you all sorts of perks such as "dinner once a year" with the man himself. How about that eh? Dinner with Laurence Fox once a year. Just imagine the suspense as that day approaches and finally dawns. Making a list of things to talk about. The agonizing over what to wear. Just the whole sense of occasion.
No, Owen is a good guy. The reason people hate him is that he's articulate and effective. Plus his youthful look and motormouth vibe turns some off. But I like him. And if you read/view the actual output you find it's nothing like the crazed lefty of caricature.
For someone who is a "nice guy" he posts some pretty nasty stuff.
In the run up to the locals the mood music from the government is very much 'looking forward to freedom'. For example we learn today that quarantines for those whose being taken out on visits and excursions from care homes are being scrapped from Tuesday.
This suggests to me that the tory canvassers on the ground are hearing much more about the slow release from lockdown than they are about Boris's wallpaper.
It wouldn't take a swing to labour for the tories to have a bad night. It would only take conservative voters to sit on their hands or start voting for lib dem or independents like residents association or libertarians like Reform, Reclaim etc.
The way the government is behaving in the run up to the polls suggests they are concerned about disaffected tory voters drifting or abstaining.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
And Ministers told the fishing industry this, did they? And voters? Or are you saying that they lied?
Honestly, this is why your righteous anger never really hits the mark. Why he obtuse, you know the answers the the question, I know the answer the the question. In fact the whole world realises and no one cares because fishing is worth about 3p to the UK economy.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
He said make money "from it" - the "it" being their preaching of socialism. So I assume he means left wing politicos getting rich either from their job or their platform, as opposed to the usual guff that you can't hold authentic left wing views if your finances are healthy.
I was specifically criticising the likes of Owen Jones and his Patreon account, rather than making any more general point about people with left-wing views.
I have nothing but respect for Nick, although we agree on little politically. We need good people to stand for elected office, and I will always support those who do.
Ok, fair enough. I get you. But the reality of OJ differs from how you view him. I don't really blame you, he's a bogeyman for the right and you'd have to take a dive into his stuff to counteract that, which one wouldn't expect you to, life's too short, but my strong impression from quite a lot of exposure to him and his output, is that he's no charlatan, he is genuinely driven in the main by his politics. Of course ego and related flaws will never be totally absent in someone whose career success relies on exposure and followers.
I dont know if it has been.mentioned on the thread but the Times is reporting that the favourite to succeed ArlenFoster, Edwin Poots, is a Creationist who believes the Earth was formed only 6000 yrs ago...where do these loons come from?
I dont know if it has been.mentioned on the thread but the Times is reporting that the favourite to succeed ArlenFoster, Edwin Poots, is a Creationist who believes the Earth was formed only 6000 yrs ago...where do these loons come from?
I wonder why dinosaurs aren't mentioned in the Bible?
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
And Ministers told the fishing industry this, did they? And voters? Or are you saying that they lied?
And how exactly would you tell the fishing industry you're using them to get a better deal for the rest of the nation from the EU, without your strategy being leaked back to the EU half a second later?
This is how negotiations work in the real world. Choices need to be made, not everyone can be 100% satisfied. Choices have consequences.
The UK is Norway's largest export market. We take 20% of everything they ship out. Without us, they'd be fucked
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
They export oil and gas to the UK. It's not as if they won't find other buyers for it in about 2.3 seconds.
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
Hang on. This is not what we were told in the lead up to the referendum. Nor in the lead up to the deal the PM agreed when a lot of other far more valuable sectors were sacrificed. The fishing industry was never off the lips of senior Ministers. It seemed to be the only thing they cared about.
So what was it all for, if not them?
To get the EU to waste time and resources on it in the negotiations. Anyone who was paying attention realised that from the moment Frost took over, fish was only ever a negotiating tool for the UK. They were always going to get sold down the river in order to give leverage in other bits of the negotiations such as the LPF and governance where we got much bigger prizes.
As for LPF Britain didn't even get as good a deal on LPF provisions as Canada did. So if this was the game they were playing they played it badly.
Very strange use of 'didn't even' when the EU claim was specifically that we couldn't get anywhere near Canada precisely because we're only 20 miles away.
It’s amazing how many people preaching socialism, have found themselves a way to make a good living from it [Sandpit is referring to capitalism]!
Is it? Through a mixture of hard work and sheer luck, I've had a very successful career in private industry, two self-employed businesses and a senior charity role. But I'd rather live in a society which paid me less and was more equal. In the absence of that, I live fairly modestly and give the rest away. What's the inconsistency? Do I need to fail in work in order to qualify to criticise the system?
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
I didn’t mean you Nick, who had a successful private sector career and then went into politics as an elected representative.
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
You're being somewhat unfair to Owen Jones. His Patreon channel offers exactly the same content to all subscribers, whether they pay £3 per month or £100. Socialism in action, I'd say. I'd guess most pay £3. And the income is not used to line his own pockets - it's used to hire staff and resources to produce videos, podcasts etc. I'm sure Jones has a healthy income from his journalism and his books, so I'd be astonished if he uses any of the Patreon subscriptions for personal gain.
Yes, all "tiers" get the same content. So it's 3 quid basically. Glad to see that. Very different to Lozza's offering. There the £100 per month "Top Fox" membership gets you all sorts of perks such as "dinner once a year" with the man himself. How about that eh? Dinner with Laurence Fox once a year. Just imagine the suspense as that day approaches and finally dawns. Making a list of things to talk about. The agonizing over what to wear. Just the whole sense of occasion.
No, Owen is a good guy. The reason people hate him is that he's articulate and effective. Plus his youthful look and motormouth vibe turns some off. But I like him. And if you read/view the actual output you find it's nothing like the crazed lefty of caricature.
For someone who is a "nice guy" he posts some pretty nasty stuff.
He makes money telling woke Guardianistas what they want to hear. Fair enough. It's a good business model, and even an honourable one if he believes most of what he says. But it's not a good model for winning elections in Milton Keynes or wherever.
Comments
The EU does need to let Ireland deal with it though, the UK and RoI were quietly working on the required fudge before Varadkar and Barnier decided to change tack and use the border as a negotiating point.
The quotes in the article make it sound like the Tories are expecting a narrow win.
The beauty of the GFA is that none of this really mattered. Thanks, Boris.
Met my chap's brother once, who, at a wedding where I'd been invited, as The Boss, to put in an appearance told me angrily that ALL the Trouble.... this was mid 70's...... was the fault of the Catholics.
I'm firmly of the opinion that the Irish Question is up there with that of Schleswig-Holstein.
The difficulty is that, although people in GB are as David says largely indifferent to events in NI, people in NI are largely indifferent to the priorities of the UK government. Compared with maintaining peace in NI, Brexit is a very secondary issue for NI voters. Therefore, the proposal to revise the GFA in order to make Brexit work better is explosive, because of the perception that this *might* reignite the Troubles. And that's before you think how the US Congress would react.
Moreover, there is a third way which almost certainly commands popular consent ("support" would overstate it) in NI, which is to make NI a de facto associate member of the EU with close links to Eire, but still independent of Eire. And that's exactly what's happened. In everything that matters in everyday life (trade, cross-border movement), NI is effectively in the EU. And yes, it creates a border in the Irish Sea for trade purposes, but the inconveniences caused by that are minor compared with a real border between NI and Eire, because for now the UK and EU have the same regulations, so there isn't much to check.
Is it logical? No. Is it durable? For a while, until UK and EU legislation differ so much that the Irish Sea border needs to start checking seriously whether, for instance, genetically-engineered food is crossing. Perhaps by then, there will be a wider consensus for Irish unity, or some other solution. But as a pragmatic solution for now, it works, and that's what matters to most people.
PS And yes, it means Johnson lied when he said there wouldn't be an Irish Sea border. But supporting the Conservatives these days requires a certain insouciance about truth.
I doubt they will be troubling the ballot boxes next week.
https://www.patreon.com/owenjones84
At present far too much of the daily life stuff is controlled by Westminster.
Top one - "Solidarity" - is £10 a month, as far as I can see.
£3, £5, or £10 but you get the same content regardless. That's what it looks like.
https://cdn.survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/30202446/Survation-Daily-Mail-Politics-Poll-Tables.xlsx
So what is the likely required solution? "the proposal to revise the GFA in order to make Brexit work better" - in other words England forces NI to do something it didn't vote for that makes it highly likely that a significant number of people there will get violently angry.
A "United" Kingdom that forces one nation's will upon another not even caring how disastrous it will be on the other nation who voted NOT to do this? Well, do I need to say more? It isn't the NI/GB border that isn't logical or durable, its the UK.
Hero, Superhero, and Producer-baby.
I don't object to him doing it, but I do want to see that he lives by his own values.
I don't know why its such a hard concept for you - its happened at every election from 2010 onwards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_West_Midlands_mayoral_election
It's not a part of the socialist dream that you work for nothing. He's self employed, makes content, charges for some of it.
The Tories are likely to win majorities in key marginals including Dudley, Northumberland and Derby and increase their number of seats in Red Wall areas by a third, a YouGov survey for The Times has found. The Conservatives are also likely to be the largest party in Bolton." {£}
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/red-wall-blues-to-deepen-in-former-labour-heartlands-8n5870r7n
At worst it could be his Cummings moment with one rule for them and another for us. But just as likely it’s seen as an intrusive bit of filming and no one really cares since the relaxing of the lockdown rules.
I had no side effects from either of my doses. So hope the same for you. 🤞
The mail is conducting a Boris 'love in' this morning in contrast to their recent anti Boris narratives
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1388390675360649217
They were asking everyone on arrival if it was first or second dose, overwhelming majority of people were there for their second. So people were able bodied, I'd guess most people there were ~60s with some younger mixed in.
In general, there are lots of people who are talented or fortunate enough to do well under any system, but who would like one with more equal outcomes, reflecting the degree of luck in making a success of life in financial terms.
On topic David is right, the GFA is a deeply uncomfortable and deeply unsuitable status quo. The only thing is that what came before was much worse.
People are afraid that something worse will return, but we should be seeking something better instead.
Currently, a quarter of AstraZeneca stocks remain unused in France, a figure that could increase as more Pfizer jabs become available. On Friday, Health Minister Olivier Véran said he had asked the French health watchdog to examine whether it would be possible to offer the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine to those under 55. Volunteers for the vaccine would be required to sign a release form.
Patrick Vogt, a general practitioner in the city of Mulhouse, said he is desperate for the government to change its recommendations after he was forced to throw away doses of AstraZeneca last week.
“I managed to vaccinate 6 patients in 3 days. The others said they didn’t want to, or wanted to wait for another vaccine,” said Dr. Vogt. “So my vials were going out of date, I had to throw them away.”
After posting a video of himself throwing doses in the bin, Dr. Vogt received dozens of calls from volunteers in their forties who wanted to get a jab — people he is not allowed to vaccinate.
https://www.politico.eu/article/france-coronavirus-vaccine-glut/
I was referring to the likes of Owen Jones, who seems to be earning close to ten grand a month from Patreon, writing polemic about how capitalism is awful and we need to smash up the system.
They literally fetishise their fleg. Are there any anthropologists/psychologists around that can comment on cases of tribes that have easily changed their fetish objects?
How many religions have preached about 'charity' and living a life of abstinence etc from cathedrals full of gold?
I have nothing but respect for Nick, although we agree on little politically. We need good people to stand for elected office, and I will always support those who do.
In that light, why aren't we waterboarding them, metaphorically?
Close our market to them until they yield on fish
https://twitter.com/nwpruralcrime/status/1388386952337149953?s=21
Ultimately the government has made the (correct IMO) call that fishing is an industry that will have to live or die without significant support from the state. It simply isn't a key industry for us.
It’s not a popular opinion, but I think our MPs are badly underpaid for the job we expect them to do. My solution would be to get them to stop pretending to be social workers and concentrate on the legislative role, letting those that want to carry on with their day job. After all we expect the PM to be able to do that job while being an MP so it should be doable for many other jobs as well.
No, Owen is a good guy. The reason people hate him is that he's articulate and effective. Plus his youthful look and motormouth vibe turns some off. But I like him. And if you read/view the actual output you find it's nothing like the crazed lefty of caricature.
So what was it all for, if not them?
£200 gets you no dinner with Fox.
Apart from that...
Before the referendum there were these options re GFA,NI,RoI:
Remain to win - steady as she goes, but that ship sailed.
or
Brexit to win and:
stay in EEA/join EFTA
stay in single market
find a technology solution to the border
relax EU red lines
something like Mrs May's deal
RoI to leave EU in parallel with UK
NI to decide to join RoI
agree to have a border within Ireland.
Neither Brexit nor Remain campaigned on the basis that Brexit was impossible.
Most MPs were for remain. But
Parliament failed to agree any of the options within its powers.
The DUP doesn't support anything at all.
It's time to reconsider red lines, however sacrosanct.
The whole point of Brexit - I thought - was to regain this ability, to invigorate the nation so we could invade, conquer, and plunder other nations, just like in the good old days That's what UKIP promised us, the old Britain, the Britain of the 50s - by which I presumed they meant the 1750s or the 1850s. Surely not the 1950s when all we did was eat suet pudding in the drizzle?!
If we don't go back to the old imperial Britain that tupped the world and gave birth to modernity then I for one think Brexit is pointless, and I want to abandon it
Funnily enough since that happened all those who were saying "who cares about fish, its meaningless" have suddenly started saying "but the fish"
This suggests to me that the tory canvassers on the ground are hearing much more about the slow release from lockdown than they are about Boris's wallpaper.
It wouldn't take a swing to labour for the tories to have a bad night. It would only take conservative voters to sit on their hands or start voting for lib dem or independents like residents association or libertarians like Reform, Reclaim etc.
The way the government is behaving in the run up to the polls suggests they are concerned about disaffected tory voters drifting or abstaining.
They should be.
Sigh
This is how negotiations work in the real world. Choices need to be made, not everyone can be 100% satisfied. Choices have consequences.