Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Porn Legacy: Theresa May’s aides want Damian Green to quit
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Porn Legacy: Theresa May’s aides want Damian Green to quit
The Porn Legacy: Mrs May's aides, including her Chief of Staff, want Damian Green to quit.https://t.co/r1GXdkHLM6 pic.twitter.com/xDGMx0XZyw
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Mr. Mark, food banks first appeared here during Blair's time. Not seen recent stats, but a couple of years ago, there'd been an annual increase, constantly. Through boom, recession, recovery. Rising food bank usage doesn't indicate economic health or anything else, except the progression of time. Until it levels off, we won't be able to assess policy impact on food banks.
FPT: Mr. Richard, indeed.
On-topic: there's more here than the claim. There's the conduct of police, which matters far more. Green going would legitimise police officers keeping information acquired in the course of criminal investigations and then releasing that information a decade later, after leaving the police, to prosecute a personal vendetta.
It's extremely disturbing. Public trust in the police is essential, and this has harmed their standing significantly.
As an aside, it's wryly amusing to watch the BBC, having acted as propaganda agents by unquestioningly broadcasting the party political on behalf of the Stasi the other day, now reporting on questions being raised over the ex-officers' decision to release such information.
Amused? Not sure that's the word I'd use.
*cough*BREXIT*cough*
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/02/politics/fbi-agent-removed-trump-investigation/index.html
Trump is of course totally all over this on tw@tter.
http://www.dw.com/en/german-intel-chief-warns-of-potential-threat-posed-by-wives-children-of-german-jihadis/a-41630197
He can claim Brexit negotiations had been to textbook and he had conceded not a single 'concrete' concession in 18 months. With his resignation still wet on the page Mrs May and the government capitulate, or drive us over cliff-edge Brexit.
What a hero! Let's make him PM!
Rolls-Royce and a host of US and Chinese companies have been lobbying and waiting for the support since George Osborne first promised them a share of £250m two years ago.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/dec/03/mini-nuclear-power-stations-uk-government-funding
Those desperate to get rid of him are making basic mistakes.
As you say the Senate is a long shot considering the seats up but the Dems could even have a shot there if Jones nicks it on Tuesday week in Alabama and we will see if Cotton replaces Tillerson.
Also, they should alter the plans to include the world's highest salt water fountain, going up every time the water was let in and out. Like the Jet d'eau in Geneva. The current highest is in Saudi Arabia. It would be a big tourist attraction, albeit that it would slightly reduce output.
That's for the 35% of MPs who look at PB. You can have that idea free!
https://news.sky.com/story/trump-deflects-attention-amid-questions-over-whether-he-knew-ex-security-adviser-michael-flynn-lied-to-fbi-11154637
I think there's a bit more to the story than this
If it is used as pretext by congress to wind up the investigation or oust Mueller there will be anarchy. The New York AG is chomping at the bit to go after Trump's financials.
Is this seriously being advanced as a reason?
If there is strong evidence, then Green is a goner.
But, the fact that such a weak argument is being advanced, suggests to me that the evidence is not there.
What is the strike price? And do you know if it's on an escalator or is fixed price?
Thanks
It is why waiting for UC for 6 weeks is particularly bad.
Anyway, I must be off.
Is there an actual purpose to it ?
You may wish to keep the clever-cleverness quiet for a bit.
Maybe.
I was involved in setting up one of the early ones in 2008-9, and the demand was enormous from the off. They had been needed badly for years but Labour made it very hard to set them up. The coalition came in and encouraged their spread. That must have had some impact.
https://fullfact.org/economy/why-are-more-people-using-food-banks/
I'm assuming McDonnell's wargaming scenarios consist of re-reading A Very British Coup and having a round table discussion about what exactly to do when the tanks circle Heathrow. If the thought of that lot in government is enough to get me to think about leaving, one can only imagine what is going through the minds of those in the establishment with a lot more than me to protect.
Perhaps they are all buying bitcoin...
A. Porn Flakes!
(I thank you!)
I should add though that it is some time since I was actively involved in that particular food bank so my information isn't recent.
Largo, because he prefers things that aren't Quick.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42216622
I don't think this is really that odd. We know most famous people don't solely control their tw@tter etc.
I would however hope that there would be a way of having permission based logins, such that staff can do their work, track who did what when and also enable the "boss" to remain in control.
My own position is that I'd be happy to pay a little extra tax to help reduce the widening gap in society, but I genuinely fear the economic chaos a Corbyn government would lead to and think it wise to keep an eye on the exit. The fact that McDonnell is wargaming precisely these scenarios is, as BannedInParis points out, a bad sign, not a good one, of what's to come.
Lab 41.3%
Con 39.5%
LD 7.3%
UKIP 4.2%
Greens 2.5%
Changes from the general election:
Lab +0.3%
Con -4.0%
LD -0.3%
UKIP +2.3%
Greens +0.8%
In one sense I'm less worried about their existence - anybody can suddenly have an emergency which leaves them in difficulty if they have no savings, and even on a decent wage it isn't easy to save with the housing costs the way they are. What bothers me more is that there seems to be little meaningful effort at addressing the underlying problems of chronic users of food banks. If it were me, I would have said that after three consecutive visits another service/benefit should kick in, because constant use is not what they were intended for. That's where I think the system shows itself as fundamentally broken.
I would also add that I think the person who thought UC should be paid in arrears starting after six weeks is somebody of such low intelligence that they would fail the entrance examination for kindergarten. Heck, they might even fail to be classed as a moron on the basis that implies their IQ is a positive number. I hate to think quite how much their father had to pay the board to get them a cushy number in the Civil Service. It should be paid after one week, maximum, and then in advance.
But there's one fundamental thing that he gets wrong, that makes it very hard to treat his seriously as an economist: he doesn't understand what savings and debt are. (In this he is hardly alone. Economists spend far too little time on the basic building blocks of money, savings and debt.)
Savings and debt are mechanisms for the time transfer of work. When I save, I let somebody consume my share of this year's production, in return for getting some additional share of future production. When I borrow, I am consuming more of this year's production, in return for giving up some of my own production at some point in the future.
When you absolve someone of their debts, you are both saying "you do not have to give up a portion of your future production", and you are telling someone else "you have handed over a portion of your past production, and you will no longer receive a portion of somebody else's future production". Varoufakis gets the first part of the proposition, but fails to understand that it must imply the second.
The Varoufakis worldview is that borrowing and savings are entirely separate things, when they are just different sides of the same coin.
"Strange game.
The only winning move is not to play...."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHWjlCaIrQo
Price's comment was up there with Dubya's finest, which would surely be 'more and more of our imports are coming from abroad.'
GE2022 doesn't look good. The remainers will, of course, vote against the Tories. The ultra hard line Brexiteers may vote UKIP if any kind of concession is made to the EU. 'Soft' leavers may change their mind once hard Brexit becomes a reality. And the version of Brexit the Tories are pursuing (with a heavy focus on ending immigration above all else) may appeal largely to a working class who would consider it an act of class betrayal to vote Conservative anyway.
Wasn't he speaking as Governor of Texas and talking about imports into Texas, versus from the rest of America and rest of the world?
Edit - that would then leave 'when you say you're going to do something and then don't do it, that's trustworthiness,' as his finest gaffe.
This means the true level of support for UKIP in 2017 was 3.1%.