Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Truss view of “British Workers” could be an electoral liability – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited August 21 in General
The Truss view of “British Workers” could be an electoral liability – politicalbetting.com

It takes some brass neck to say British workers need “more graft” when you’ve served in a government that hasn’t done its day job for months.Not content with thinking nurses in the north are worth less, apparently Liz Truss thinks Brits are all lazy too https://t.co/6USMGb7lRX

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 104,912
    I expect they may go down well with Tory members. They were also not necessarily wrong either if you compare our work rate to China's for example. However most British workers do not want to work as hard as the Chinese
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,502
    Typo. She actually said more grift. The current incarnation of the Tory party know all about that :wink:
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,931
    These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,705
    Noones going to care about these comments with their 5 grand energy bills.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 23,247
    Perhaps its a comment of the work rate of Conservative politicians and their lackeys.

    It certainly seems to apply to what's been happening in Downing Street in recent years.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027
    edited August 17
    Let me guess: have the Guardian and Nandy taken something massively out of context and given it a meaning it never had?
  • These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.

    The only people offended by those comments are those who are looking for offence as they hate Truss because of the fact she's a Tory.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,551

    These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.

    She said they needed to graft more so work harder . Which means she thinks they currently aren’t working hard enough , the implication being they’re lazy . Not sure what else can be taken from her comments .
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,285
    Pulpstar said:

    Noones going to care about these comments with their 5 grand energy bills.

    Exactly. The total absence of a coherent plan to tackle this is going to see the Tories fall through the floor in the polls come October, when the first bills start hitting.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027
    nico679 said:

    These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.

    She said they needed to graft more so work harder . Which means she thinks they currently aren’t working hard enough , the implication being they’re lazy . Not sure what else can be taken from her comments .
    "the implication" is your inference, nothing more.
  • Looks like the BoE got their projections spot on. So a recession on the way, let's see how well Truss copes with that, I predict badly
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 7,783
    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.
  • Off Topic, a question for the PB scientific community:

    In 1978 the famous Astrophysicist Brian May, assisted by F. Mercury, postulated that the Earth's angular momentum was due to 'Fat bottomed girls'. After more than 40 years without being disproven, refuted or challenged, should this now be considered a scientific fact?
  • kyf_100 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Noones going to care about these comments with their 5 grand energy bills.

    Exactly. The total absence of a coherent plan to tackle this is going to see the Tories fall through the floor in the polls come October, when the first bills start hitting.
    What should worry the Tories is this is now the consensus view on here it seems.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,033
    Another example of Truss's knowing a little bit about economics. This is a highly dangerous trait.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,551
    edited August 17
    Driver said:

    nico679 said:

    These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.

    She said they needed to graft more so work harder . Which means she thinks they currently aren’t working hard enough , the implication being they’re lazy . Not sure what else can be taken from her comments .
    "the implication" is your inference, nothing more.
    Most people listening to her comments would think her view is British workers are lazy and need to work harder . Seems the Liz fans are a bit miffed today as the “ chosen one “ screwed up with her previous comments and she’s given an open goal to the opposition .
  • EPG said:

    Another example of Truss's knowing a little bit about economics. This is a highly dangerous trait.

    She has a dangerous habit - which IMHO will see her come unstuck quickly - in that she starts talking about things she doesn't know anything about. Other politicians do that of course but she doesn't know when to stop.

    For all his many faults, Starmer has a much tighter grip on just blurting out rubbish
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 23,247
    Has Truss considered that there's no point working harder if there's nothing to be gained by so doing ?

    Worse still if the gain from harder work all goes to the 1% then harder work merely increases inequality.

    People might work harder if it allows them to go from a VW to a BMW but they will not if they still get the VW while the bosses go from a Bentley to a Rolls-Royce.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027
    nico679 said:

    Driver said:

    nico679 said:

    These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.

    She said they needed to graft more so work harder . Which means she thinks they currently aren’t working hard enough , the implication being they’re lazy . Not sure what else can be taken from her comments .
    "the implication" is your inference, nothing more.
    Most people listening to her comments would think (...)
    Citation needed.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648
    edited August 17
    Morning all, worst Tory score for a while from YouGov, but its fieldwork is early last week

    Latest Westminster voting intention (9-10 Aug)

    Con: 30% (-3 from 4-5 Aug)
    Lab: 39% (+2)
    Lib Dem: 12% (+1)
    Green: 6% (-2)
    Reform UK: 4% (+1)
    SNP: 5% (=)

    https://t.co/Xgd8rtkVi8 https://t.co/j8nQUV6ApA
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,109
    When Truss explodes, both the currently sane(r) wing of the Tory party, and the headbangers, are gonna say "I told you so..."
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 7,783
    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    I believe the customary proceedure is Andrew Neil, unless Brillo is now too woke for today's Conservative Party.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027

    Has Truss considered that there's no point working harder if there's nothing to be gained by so doing ?

    Worse still if the gain from harder work all goes to the 1% then harder work merely increases inequality.

    People might work harder if it allows them to go from a VW to a BMW but they will not if they still get the VW while the bosses go from a Bentley to a Rolls-Royce.

    She probably has, which is why it's inaccurate to say that she's calling British workers lazy...
  • Morning all, worst Tory score for a while from YouGov, but its fieldwork is early last week

    Latest Westminster voting intention (9-10 Aug)

    Con: 30% (-3 from 4-5 Aug)
    Lab: 39% (+2)
    Lib Dem: 12% (+1)
    Green: 6% (-2)
    Reform UK: 4% (+1)
    SNP: 5% (=)

    https://t.co/Xgd8rtkVi8 https://t.co/j8nQUV6ApA

    Useless Starmer must quit!

    Is this post energy policy?
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027

    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    I believe the customary proceedure is Andrew Neil, unless Brillo is now too woke for today's Conservative Party.
    He was once capable of doing a proper interview, but recent years show he can only do clickbaity "gotcha" interviews of the modern fashion.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648

    Morning all, worst Tory score for a while from YouGov, but its fieldwork is early last week

    Latest Westminster voting intention (9-10 Aug)

    Con: 30% (-3 from 4-5 Aug)
    Lab: 39% (+2)
    Lib Dem: 12% (+1)
    Green: 6% (-2)
    Reform UK: 4% (+1)
    SNP: 5% (=)

    https://t.co/Xgd8rtkVi8 https://t.co/j8nQUV6ApA

    Useless Starmer must quit!

    Is this post energy policy?
    No its early last week Horse, its quite old already
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027

    Morning all, worst Tory score for a while from YouGov, but its fieldwork is early last week

    Latest Westminster voting intention (9-10 Aug)

    Con: 30% (-3 from 4-5 Aug)
    Lab: 39% (+2)
    Lib Dem: 12% (+1)
    Green: 6% (-2)
    Reform UK: 4% (+1)
    SNP: 5% (=)

    https://t.co/Xgd8rtkVi8 https://t.co/j8nQUV6ApA

    Useless Starmer must quit!

    Is this post energy policy?
    Literally in the post you quoted: "its fieldwork is early last week"
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,416
    Driver said:

    nico679 said:

    These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.

    She said they needed to graft more so work harder . Which means she thinks they currently aren’t working hard enough , the implication being they’re lazy . Not sure what else can be taken from her comments .
    "the implication" is your inference, nothing more.
    Because of the implication...


  • Isn't this related to her Thatcherite perspective? Rewards come to those who work hard. This has a negative inference (but not logically true) that if you do not have rewards then you are not working hard enough.
  • Morning all, worst Tory score for a while from YouGov, but its fieldwork is early last week

    Latest Westminster voting intention (9-10 Aug)

    Con: 30% (-3 from 4-5 Aug)
    Lab: 39% (+2)
    Lib Dem: 12% (+1)
    Green: 6% (-2)
    Reform UK: 4% (+1)
    SNP: 5% (=)

    https://t.co/Xgd8rtkVi8 https://t.co/j8nQUV6ApA

    Useless Starmer must quit!

    Is this post energy policy?
    No its early last week Horse, its quite old already
    We'll see a bounce post that policy IMHO
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648
    edited August 17
    A quick scan of the data on that YouGov shows 2 things that stand out - in raw numbers Labour have gained little (but some tbf) supporters, but the Tories have lost nearly 40% of their 2019 to not sure/no vote/some defections.
    Secondly, the under 49s are even more rabidly anti Tory than usual.
    Oh, and the tories have a 1 point lead in the South ;)
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    Very good point. And it's not just here. There have been a lot more articles recently (one in the Speccie) saying you're a fool if you do more than what you are contractually obliged to do because you will never be recognised by your bosses for it and you'll just be at risk of pay cuts / redundancy as everyone else.

    A rather cynical view but unfortunately borne out by events. Especially so when you have so many low quality CEOs running U.K. accompanies.

    Has Truss considered that there's no point working harder if there's nothing to be gained by so doing ?

    Worse still if the gain from harder work all goes to the 1% then harder work merely increases inequality.

    People might work harder if it allows them to go from a VW to a BMW but they will not if they still get the VW while the bosses go from a Bentley to a Rolls-Royce.

  • Has Truss considered that there's no point working harder if there's nothing to be gained by so doing ?

    Worse still if the gain from harder work all goes to the 1% then harder work merely increases inequality.

    People might work harder if it allows them to go from a VW to a BMW but they will not if they still get the VW while the bosses go from a Bentley to a Rolls-Royce.

    Well considering that Truss wants to reverse the tax rise that Sunak put in place that solely affected income from working, while allowing income not from PAYE to evade the tax rise, it seems she at least is the least-worst option from that perspective.
  • Has Starmer exceeded Corbyn's brief period of leads yet? He lead for about half of 2017 right?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,771
    She's not a Reaganite, unfortunately.
    It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648

    Morning all, worst Tory score for a while from YouGov, but its fieldwork is early last week

    Latest Westminster voting intention (9-10 Aug)

    Con: 30% (-3 from 4-5 Aug)
    Lab: 39% (+2)
    Lib Dem: 12% (+1)
    Green: 6% (-2)
    Reform UK: 4% (+1)
    SNP: 5% (=)

    https://t.co/Xgd8rtkVi8 https://t.co/j8nQUV6ApA

    Useless Starmer must quit!

    Is this post energy policy?
    No its early last week Horse, its quite old already
    We'll see a bounce post that policy IMHO
    Im not no sure. Labours vote is already pretty firm, the policy would need to attract defectors, and given everything thats happened im not convinced one policy announcement will do that. Maybe a bounce but im not convinced.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,931

    What is the point in working harder, the Tories take my money and spend it on pensioners who do fuck all

    That's why Truss wants to cut the taxes of people like you. She's on your side. :smile:
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 27,573
    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    Stephen Sackur.

    Actually I think Evan Davis is pretty good as an interviewer as well.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 17,281
    Betfair next prime minister
    1.09 Liz Truss 92%
    11.5 Rishi Sunak 9%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.09 Liz Truss 92%
    11.5 Rishi Sunak 9%
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,322
    geoffw said:

    She's not a Reaganite, unfortunately.
    It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?

    Not true. Slaves were often worked to death.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,234

    What is the point in working harder, the Tories take my money and spend it on pensioners who do fuck all

    That's why Truss wants to cut the taxes of people like you. She's on your side. :smile:
    Lovely. And, just in case predictions of growth generation or yet more efficiency savings do not bear out, what will get cut?

    I'm not opposed to reductions, but there seems a lot of promises to meet.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 23,117
    The only graft I am prepared to do is whatever is necessary to protect my family from the fallout of having such a useless government in power.

    Is that the sort of "graft" she means? Don't know. Don't care.

    Our political class is worse than useless. An active menace in fact.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648
    Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,502

    Off Topic, a question for the PB scientific community:

    In 1978 the famous Astrophysicist Brian May, assisted by F. Mercury, postulated that the Earth's angular momentum was due to 'Fat bottomed girls'. After more than 40 years without being disproven, refuted or challenged, should this now be considered a scientific fact?

    Probably. Didn't we recently have some of the fastest days* on record? And rising rates of obesity. Now, correlation != causation, but it's, you know, suggestive

    *the aptly named Ars confirms https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/08/record-short-days-could-speed-up-debate-on-leap-seconds/
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,771

    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    Stephen Sackur.

    Actually I think Evan Davis is pretty good as an interviewer as well.
    Freddy Whassisname from Unherd is pretty good.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,512
    geoffw said:

    She's not a Reaganite, unfortunately.
    It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?

    The Japanese have a word for death by overwork. Karoshi


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karoshi
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,908

    geoffw said:

    She's not a Reaganite, unfortunately.
    It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?

    Not true. Slaves were often worked to death.
    Not just slaves.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karoshi
  • kle4 said:

    What is the point in working harder, the Tories take my money and spend it on pensioners who do fuck all

    That's why Truss wants to cut the taxes of people like you. She's on your side. :smile:
    Lovely. And, just in case predictions of growth generation or yet more efficiency savings do not bear out, what will get cut?

    I'm not opposed to reductions, but there seems a lot of promises to meet.
    Why won't Truss do anything for people like me?

    She is, this is what she's doing for you.

    But she's promising things to other people too.


    Truss at least seems to understand that people who work should be able to benefit from it and keep more of their own money, rather than simply ratchetting taxes from those who work to give to the client vote who don't. For that she deserves a chance at least, the alternative does not.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,908
    HYUFD said:

    I expect they may go down well with Tory members. They were also not necessarily wrong either if you compare our work rate to China's for example. However most British workers do not want to work as hard as the Chinese

    Most Tory Party members don't want to work at all. Lazy sods, expecting to keep their triple-lock pensions.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,744
    edited August 17
    EPG said:

    Another example of Truss's knowing a little bit about economics. This is a highly dangerous trait.

    Yes, but in fairness one she shares with many people.

    One thing I learned early in my career is that over here you need a Master's in economics before your opinions are worth anything - it's the economics equivalent of the four-to-six months of basic training that a soldier needs. Undergraduate degrees haven't cut it since the 80s. In the US you're expected to have a doctorate.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 2,027

    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    Stephen Sackur.
    Ah, yes, that's the bloke I was trying to remember. Any chance of the BBC requesting it, or do they want the Neil gotcha?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 7,783

    Has Starmer exceeded Corbyn's brief period of leads yet? He lead for about half of 2017 right?

    Corbyn had a few YouGov leads in spring 2016. On average he had fairly consistent single figure leads June 2017-February 2018, but never big enough to stop Conservative outliers. The biggest gap between individual polls showing Conservative leads was only about two months.
    Then there was a run of leads in April/May 2019 (though they were more about Labour's share falling a bit less than the Conservative share).

    Starmer's first lead in this wave was at the beginning of November 2021, and the last Conservative lead was early December, 252 days ago.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,771
    The BBC says: OECD figures show that in 2019, the UK came fourth highest in the rankings of GDP per hour worked among G7 countries.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62571016
    In fact it is fifth (out of seven), and the same position in 2020.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,859
    edited August 17
    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    It’s a short list:

    Andrew Neil
    Stephen Sackur
    Emma Barnett maybe

    But yes, would be good to see a long-form interview with a decent interviewer, someone more interested in letting her explain her views, than trying to catch her out for clicks and likes with a 30-second out-of-context soundbite of a one-hour interview.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,908

    What is the point in working harder, the Tories take my money and spend it on pensioners who do fuck all

    Not true. CB, you are being grossly unfair. They work very hard when the postal ballot comes round, writing the X against the name of the local brain-damaged chimpanzee with a blue rosette Araldited to his fur.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,771
    Leon said:

    geoffw said:

    She's not a Reaganite, unfortunately.
    It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?

    The Japanese have a word for death by overwork. Karoshi


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karoshi
    They are bottom of the OECD G7 table, so perhaps more deaths from puffer fish than karoshi.

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 7,783
    Driver said:

    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    Stephen Sackur.
    Ah, yes, that's the bloke I was trying to remember. Any chance of the BBC requesting it, or do they want the Neil gotcha?
    Neil works for Channel 4 now, so I don't know who the BBC would use. But the main thing is that Truss is ahead, she's got nothing to gain by doing a tricky interview, so why should she? Standard playbook, unfortunately.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,908
    Selebian said:

    Off Topic, a question for the PB scientific community:

    In 1978 the famous Astrophysicist Brian May, assisted by F. Mercury, postulated that the Earth's angular momentum was due to 'Fat bottomed girls'. After more than 40 years without being disproven, refuted or challenged, should this now be considered a scientific fact?

    Probably. Didn't we recently have some of the fastest days* on record? And rising rates of obesity. Now, correlation != causation, but it's, you know, suggestive

    *the aptly named Ars confirms https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/08/record-short-days-could-speed-up-debate-on-leap-seconds/
    Ars gratia artis and all that.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 17,281

    Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.

    Liz Cheney is the American Rishi Sunak, condemned for acting against their mafia don boss.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,473
    geoffw said:

    The BBC says: OECD figures show that in 2019, the UK came fourth highest in the rankings of GDP per hour worked among G7 countries.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62571016
    In fact it is fifth (out of seven), and the same position in 2020.

    It's not the hours worked that count, though, is it? It's what you do with them.

    If you spend significant time scrutinising your mobile or, dare I say, posting on political websites, you're not going to be that productive. Ideally technological advancements should have enabled us to work fewer hours but be more productive.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,771
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    I expect they may go down well with Tory members. They were also not necessarily wrong either if you compare our work rate to China's for example. However most British workers do not want to work as hard as the Chinese

    Most Tory Party members don't want to work at all. Lazy sods, expecting to keep their triple-lock pensions.
    You want to pensioners to go back to work?

  • Sandpit said:

    Driver said:

    Of course, the easiest way to draw a line under this would be for Truss do an interview with a proper journalist, so she can explain what she meant and answer some questions to clarify it.

    But for whatever reason, she can't be bothered to do that.

    Which is quite ironic, really.

    Which "proper journalist" is capable of doing a proper interview, though?
    It’s a short list:

    Andrew Neil
    Stephen Sackur
    Emma Barnett maybe

    But yes, would be good to see a long-form interview with a decent interviewer, someone more interested in letting her explain her views, than trying to catch her out for clicks and likes with a 30-second out-of-context soundbite of a one-hour interview.
    Amol Rajan is quite good on the today programme.
  • Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.

    Liz Cheney is the American Rishi Sunak, condemned for acting against their mafia don boss.
    Sunak is disliked for raising taxes following a commitment not to do so, long before he left the Cabinet. He's closer to George H W Bush than Liz Cheney.
  • ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 458

    geoffw said:

    The BBC says: OECD figures show that in 2019, the UK came fourth highest in the rankings of GDP per hour worked among G7 countries.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62571016
    In fact it is fifth (out of seven), and the same position in 2020.

    It's not the hours worked that count, though, is it? It's what you do with them.
    Isn't that what "GDP per hour worked" measures?

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093

    Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.

    Liz Cheney is the American Rishi Sunak, condemned for acting against their mafia don boss.
    The GOP has become a cult.

    This will not end well at all.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,233
    I am less confident than I was that Truss will get a bounce sufficiently large to give a Tory poll lead. Her novelty factor is being worn away before she even gets the job. Bringing a new sense of purpose to the government at this stage is going to be hard. Her cabinet and emergency budget are both possibilities but I am just not seeing it.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 17,281

    Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.

    Liz Cheney is the American Rishi Sunak, condemned for acting against their mafia don boss.
    Sunak is disliked for raising taxes following a commitment not to do so, long before he left the Cabinet. He's closer to George H W Bush than Liz Cheney.
    On that note, suspending the triple lock probably did not help his Rishiness. Some of us did wonder about the wisdom of breaking manifesto commitments, which Liz Truss is now throwing back at Sunak.
  • DavidL said:

    I am less confident than I was that Truss will get a bounce sufficiently large to give a Tory poll lead. Her novelty factor is being worn away before she even gets the job. Bringing a new sense of purpose to the government at this stage is going to be hard. Her cabinet and emergency budget are both possibilities but I am just not seeing it.

    Does it make a differnece?

    Surely the relevant time you want a bounce, if you're going to get one, is at the election not years prior like Brown.

    If she can do an emergency budget that gets us through the winter and honours her election promises of reversing Sunak's tax hikes, help support Ukraine (and keep pressure on the rest of the West to keep supporting Ukraine), see the war won, see commodity prices fall back down reversing price pressures, then by 2024 she would deserve a second term.

    If she can't, well ...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,233

    geoffw said:

    The BBC says: OECD figures show that in 2019, the UK came fourth highest in the rankings of GDP per hour worked among G7 countries.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62571016
    In fact it is fifth (out of seven), and the same position in 2020.

    It's not the hours worked that count, though, is it? It's what you do with them.

    If you spend significant time scrutinising your mobile or, dare I say, posting on political websites, you're not going to be that productive. Ideally technological advancements should have enabled us to work fewer hours but be more productive.
    The problem with the internet is that there’s always distractions at hand, including PB of course. There is also the group email which is the work of the devil. Emails that you can and are expected to reply to addressed to more than 3 people should be banned in my view. They simply distract.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,233

    DavidL said:

    I am less confident than I was that Truss will get a bounce sufficiently large to give a Tory poll lead. Her novelty factor is being worn away before she even gets the job. Bringing a new sense of purpose to the government at this stage is going to be hard. Her cabinet and emergency budget are both possibilities but I am just not seeing it.

    Does it make a differnece?

    Surely the relevant time you want a bounce, if you're going to get one, is at the election not years prior like Brown.

    If she can do an emergency budget that gets us through the winter and honours her election promises of reversing Sunak's tax hikes, help support Ukraine (and keep pressure on the rest of the West to keep supporting Ukraine), see the war won, see commodity prices fall back down reversing price pressures, then by 2024 she would deserve a second term.

    If she can't, well ...
    It matters to those that bet on it!

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,705

    Vaguely a **betting post** although I know nobody was especially interested at the weekend.

    I have discovered that the reason Sunak remains available to lay at 9.8 on Smarkets is that someone has failed to turn their market making API off (or something with the same effect) - so while it looks like only a small amount available, it gets replenished as soon as you take it. About £1.50 profit in it per £100 'invested', or £2 if you take all the profit on the Truss side.

    I am heading for £1k of exposure, about 50% of which is hedged against the 12 to back at Betfair. I may keep going though at some point my bank are going to phone me when their automated scam detection software gets triggered... so, anyway, if anyone else wants a share, it looks like there's plenty.

    I'm as deep as I'd like to go on this (And then some) - but whoever's holding the 9.8 on Smarkets is probably also preventing Rishi from drifting to his true price on Betfair also now (Must be at least 15) due to arbers like yourself. You'll rarely see a rick as big as this, whoever has left that 9.8 up is losing thousands.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 19,555
    SKS Labour

    • Now £5m in debt
    • 150,000 loss of members [official]
    • 280,000 loss of members since Corbyn high point
    • 35% cut in staff after 4 rounds of redundancies

    Under. New. Management.

    Fook em
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 27,573

    kle4 said:

    What is the point in working harder, the Tories take my money and spend it on pensioners who do fuck all

    That's why Truss wants to cut the taxes of people like you. She's on your side. :smile:
    Lovely. And, just in case predictions of growth generation or yet more efficiency savings do not bear out, what will get cut?

    I'm not opposed to reductions, but there seems a lot of promises to meet.
    Why won't Truss do anything for people like me?

    She is, this is what she's doing for you.

    But she's promising things to other people too.


    Truss at least seems to understand that people who work should be able to benefit from it and keep more of their own money, rather than simply ratchetting taxes from those who work to give to the client vote who don't. For that she deserves a chance at least, the alternative does not.
    And yet she wants to keep rewarding the client vote as well. Now I have no particular objection to others doing well but only if it is sustainable. The Triple Lock is not sustainable.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 7,871
    @HYUFD re the end of last thread

    So you admit you agree to compromise with those that bomb, kill and maim, but won't compromise one iota with those that use political aims to achieve their ends.

    Says it all.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,512
    Janan Ganesh in the FT has Woken up



    "It is there, too, in the growing denial that something has gone very wrong with identity politics. When a liberal says, “There is no culture war,” what I hear is: “Please let there be no culture war. Otherwise, I shall have to fall out with my friends, stand up to my children, upset my employees. Or worse, go along with them and feel a coward.” Even if it is true that 2020 will turn out to be peak woke, it is because people — writers, comedians — took a stand. A conflict was recognised, and engaged. Those who looked away at the time don’t get to turn up now and pronounce the whole thing overblown. The poet Robert Frost once defined a liberal as someone who wouldn’t take their own side in a quarrel. It is increasingly a feat to recognise the quarrel.

    "Another liberal parry is to say that cancel culture is a distraction from the economic crisis. And perhaps it is. But then one novelist’s torment was a distraction in the not notably quiet year of 1989. There will always be a reason to dodge a subject. In the end, “salience” aside, what do you think about it?"


    https://www.ft.com/content/8700151d-eaff-44bd-a6ec-aea1895db361

    He is deluded in his forlorn hope that we might have passed Peak Woke. This psychological defence mechanism - a form of denial, because pain - was identified in the Spectator a year ago



    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,705
    edited August 17
    Truss 60% / Sunak 28% / Neither 3% / DK 9% latest ConHome survey

    60% have voted, 40% still to vote
  • vikvik Posts: 157
    There are a couple of new Florida polls on the RCP website from the University of North Florida.

    The most surprising one shows the Democrat Demings as 4 points ahead of Rubio in the Senate race. This is very different from the February poll from the same outfit which showed Rubio 12 points ahead. Rubio has lost 2 compared to that poll, while Demings has gained 14.

    Quick googling on Demings shows her to be a strong candidate (former Chief of police & current Congressperson) & it's not unrealistic that she might be able to defeat Rubio.

    The betting markets still have Rubio as a strong favourite. (1.12 on Smarkets.)

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2022/senate/fl/florida-senate-rubio-vs-demings-7382.html

    The other poll shows De Santis still ahead of Crist by 8 points, although the margin has narrowed from 21 points in their previous February poll.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2022/governor/fl/florida_governor_desantis_vs_crist-7324.html
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 7,783
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am less confident than I was that Truss will get a bounce sufficiently large to give a Tory poll lead. Her novelty factor is being worn away before she even gets the job. Bringing a new sense of purpose to the government at this stage is going to be hard. Her cabinet and emergency budget are both possibilities but I am just not seeing it.

    Does it make a differnece?

    Surely the relevant time you want a bounce, if you're going to get one, is at the election not years prior like Brown.

    If she can do an emergency budget that gets us through the winter and honours her election promises of reversing Sunak's tax hikes, help support Ukraine (and keep pressure on the rest of the West to keep supporting Ukraine), see the war won, see commodity prices fall back down reversing price pressures, then by 2024 she would deserve a second term.

    If she can't, well ...
    It matters to those that bet on it!

    Not just that. Unless something truly transformative happens (like the Falklands, or the start of Covid for Boris), the honeymoon is as good as it gets for a PM. After all, a new PM starts with a clean slate but inevitably dissapoints people, because to govern is to choose.

    I've posted this graph before, but it emphasises that all is vanity.



    You can delay entropy and decay, but you can't beat them. Of course, it may be different this time.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,233

    Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.

    Liz Cheney is the American Rishi Sunak, condemned for acting against their mafia don boss.
    Sunak is disliked for raising taxes following a commitment not to do so, long before he left the Cabinet. He's closer to George H W Bush than Liz Cheney.
    On that note, suspending the triple lock probably did not help his Rishiness. Some of us did wonder about the wisdom of breaking manifesto commitments, which Liz Truss is now throwing back at Sunak.
    To be honest his last budget was a disaster both for him and the country and it is going to be almost completely undone.
    I have no doubt that he was pressured by Treasury officials that this was the responsible thing to do after the Covid largesse but as a judgment call it was well off failing to recognise the weakness of the economy and other adverse developments.

    It is why, despite the fact that I would still have voted for him, I have become increasingly relaxed about PM Truss.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,990
    Selebian said:

    Typo. She actually said more grift. The current incarnation of the Tory party know all about that :wink:

    Graft has a similar meaning.
    Both are not entirely uncharacteristic of the current Tory party.

    Graft being "bribery and other corrupt practices used to secure illicit advantages or gains in politics or business"; grift being the small time equivalent.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,512

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am less confident than I was that Truss will get a bounce sufficiently large to give a Tory poll lead. Her novelty factor is being worn away before she even gets the job. Bringing a new sense of purpose to the government at this stage is going to be hard. Her cabinet and emergency budget are both possibilities but I am just not seeing it.

    Does it make a differnece?

    Surely the relevant time you want a bounce, if you're going to get one, is at the election not years prior like Brown.

    If she can do an emergency budget that gets us through the winter and honours her election promises of reversing Sunak's tax hikes, help support Ukraine (and keep pressure on the rest of the West to keep supporting Ukraine), see the war won, see commodity prices fall back down reversing price pressures, then by 2024 she would deserve a second term.

    If she can't, well ...
    It matters to those that bet on it!

    Not just that. Unless something truly transformative happens (like the Falklands, or the start of Covid for Boris), the honeymoon is as good as it gets for a PM. After all, a new PM starts with a clean slate but inevitably dissapoints people, because to govern is to choose.

    I've posted this graph before, but it emphasises that all is vanity.



    You can delay entropy and decay, but you can't beat them. Of course, it may be different this time.
    An interesting graph which also proves Thatcher's uniqueness, straying back into net positive territory after 8 years in power....

    Truss will be hoping she is another Thatch. Seems unlikely
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,990
    Driver said:

    nico679 said:

    These comments are like a Rorschach test. She didn’t actually call British workers lazy at all.

    She said they needed to graft more so work harder . Which means she thinks they currently aren’t working hard enough , the implication being they’re lazy . Not sure what else can be taken from her comments .
    "the implication" is your inference, nothing more.
    So what inference do you draw from her reported comments ?
  • Pulpstar said:

    Vaguely a **betting post** although I know nobody was especially interested at the weekend.

    I have discovered that the reason Sunak remains available to lay at 9.8 on Smarkets is that someone has failed to turn their market making API off (or something with the same effect) - so while it looks like only a small amount available, it gets replenished as soon as you take it. About £1.50 profit in it per £100 'invested', or £2 if you take all the profit on the Truss side.

    I am heading for £1k of exposure, about 50% of which is hedged against the 12 to back at Betfair. I may keep going though at some point my bank are going to phone me when their automated scam detection software gets triggered... so, anyway, if anyone else wants a share, it looks like there's plenty.

    I'm as deep as I'd like to go on this (And then some) - but whoever's holding the 9.8 on Smarkets is probably also preventing Rishi from drifting to his true price on Betfair also now (Must be at least 15) due to arbers like yourself. You'll rarely see a rick as big as this, whoever has left that 9.8 up is losing thousands.
    I thought I'd broken them at last (I'm into four figures now, I can't see any way the rules could differ but I do remember the Overround Fiasco) but after five minutes, the 9.8 was back.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,374
    DavidL said:

    Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.

    Liz Cheney is the American Rishi Sunak, condemned for acting against their mafia don boss.
    Sunak is disliked for raising taxes following a commitment not to do so, long before he left the Cabinet. He's closer to George H W Bush than Liz Cheney.
    On that note, suspending the triple lock probably did not help his Rishiness. Some of us did wonder about the wisdom of breaking manifesto commitments, which Liz Truss is now throwing back at Sunak.
    To be honest his last budget was a disaster both for him and the country and it is going to be almost completely undone.
    I have no doubt that he was pressured by Treasury officials that this was the responsible thing to do after the Covid largesse but as a judgment call it was well off failing to recognise the weakness of the economy and other adverse developments.

    It is why, despite the fact that I would still have voted for him, I have become increasingly relaxed about PM Truss.
    Today's Times has an excellent series of excerpts from focus groups. Sunak was apparently riding high until the family tax affairs news broke. After the eyewatering tax rises in the last budget, that definitely stuck in my craw.

    As with partygate, the implication is hard to ignore. Brits hate hypocrisy.....
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648
    edited August 17
    DavidL said:

    I am less confident than I was that Truss will get a bounce sufficiently large to give a Tory poll lead. Her novelty factor is being worn away before she even gets the job. Bringing a new sense of purpose to the government at this stage is going to be hard. Her cabinet and emergency budget are both possibilities but I am just not seeing it.

    Looking at the initial May and Johnson bounces, if they are currently 5 to 9 behind generally it should be enough to get a small lead in at least some polls, not anywhere near enough to risk an election. Both the others hit into a sweet spot about 2 to 3 months in and the lead accelerated. I think ths is where Truss will not go the same way, the headwinds will stall and eventually reverse the bounce and we buckle in for the long haul to late 2024
  • kle4 said:

    What is the point in working harder, the Tories take my money and spend it on pensioners who do fuck all

    That's why Truss wants to cut the taxes of people like you. She's on your side. :smile:
    Lovely. And, just in case predictions of growth generation or yet more efficiency savings do not bear out, what will get cut?

    I'm not opposed to reductions, but there seems a lot of promises to meet.
    Why won't Truss do anything for people like me?

    She is, this is what she's doing for you.

    But she's promising things to other people too.


    Truss at least seems to understand that people who work should be able to benefit from it and keep more of their own money, rather than simply ratchetting taxes from those who work to give to the client vote who don't. For that she deserves a chance at least, the alternative does not.
    And yet she wants to keep rewarding the client vote as well. Now I have no particular objection to others doing well but only if it is sustainable. The Triple Lock is not sustainable.
    I totally agree with you.

    Truss absolutely has her flaws and pandering to the grey vote is one of them.

    If you can find a better, alternative, politician who wants to cut taxes on people working for a living and abolish the Triple Lock then I'm all ears. Otherwise, like Biden, she's surely acceptable under the circumstances?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,736
    HYUFD said:

    I expect they may go down well with Tory members. They were also not necessarily wrong either if you compare our work rate to China's for example. However most British workers do not want to work as hard as the Chinese

    I would write to her and complain about it, but I really can't be bothered.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 8,250
    DavidL said:

    Liz Cheney lost by 37 points in her Primary. Thats an absolute monstering.

    Liz Cheney is the American Rishi Sunak, condemned for acting against their mafia don boss.
    Sunak is disliked for raising taxes following a commitment not to do so, long before he left the Cabinet. He's closer to George H W Bush than Liz Cheney.
    On that note, suspending the triple lock probably did not help his Rishiness. Some of us did wonder about the wisdom of breaking manifesto commitments, which Liz Truss is now throwing back at Sunak.
    To be honest his last budget was a disaster both for him and the country and it is going to be almost completely undone.
    I have no doubt that he was pressured by Treasury officials that this was the responsible thing to do after the Covid largesse but as a judgment call it was well off failing to recognise the weakness of the economy and other adverse developments.

    It is why, despite the fact that I would still have voted for him, I have become increasingly relaxed about PM Truss.
    What a fall from grace. After Rishi's previous budget, Frank Field no less was saying that it was greatest budget delivered during his time in politics:

    https://twitter.com/frankfieldteam/status/1367108733067816963
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I am less confident than I was that Truss will get a bounce sufficiently large to give a Tory poll lead. Her novelty factor is being worn away before she even gets the job. Bringing a new sense of purpose to the government at this stage is going to be hard. Her cabinet and emergency budget are both possibilities but I am just not seeing it.

    Does it make a differnece?

    Surely the relevant time you want a bounce, if you're going to get one, is at the election not years prior like Brown.

    If she can do an emergency budget that gets us through the winter and honours her election promises of reversing Sunak's tax hikes, help support Ukraine (and keep pressure on the rest of the West to keep supporting Ukraine), see the war won, see commodity prices fall back down reversing price pressures, then by 2024 she would deserve a second term.

    If she can't, well ...
    It matters to those that bet on it!

    Not just that. Unless something truly transformative happens (like the Falklands, or the start of Covid for Boris), the honeymoon is as good as it gets for a PM. After all, a new PM starts with a clean slate but inevitably dissapoints people, because to govern is to choose.

    I've posted this graph before, but it emphasises that all is vanity.



    You can delay entropy and decay, but you can't beat them. Of course, it may be different this time.
    Of course XKCD applies to "no politician has ever ..." at election times even without reducing the sample to 7.

    However from your sample of 7 there are only 2 that took over mid term and won the next election, which further diminishes your sample. And both of those two had a higher approval at the election they won than they did at the extreme start of your chart.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,736
    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    Typo. She actually said more grift. The current incarnation of the Tory party know all about that :wink:

    Graft has a similar meaning.
    Both are not entirely uncharacteristic of the current Tory party.

    Graft being "bribery and other corrupt practices used to secure illicit advantages or gains in politics or business"; grift being the small time equivalent.
    Except that 'graft' has a more straightforward, honest, meaning, whereas 'grift' does not.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,705

    Pulpstar said:

    Vaguely a **betting post** although I know nobody was especially interested at the weekend.

    I have discovered that the reason Sunak remains available to lay at 9.8 on Smarkets is that someone has failed to turn their market making API off (or something with the same effect) - so while it looks like only a small amount available, it gets replenished as soon as you take it. About £1.50 profit in it per £100 'invested', or £2 if you take all the profit on the Truss side.

    I am heading for £1k of exposure, about 50% of which is hedged against the 12 to back at Betfair. I may keep going though at some point my bank are going to phone me when their automated scam detection software gets triggered... so, anyway, if anyone else wants a share, it looks like there's plenty.

    I'm as deep as I'd like to go on this (And then some) - but whoever's holding the 9.8 on Smarkets is probably also preventing Rishi from drifting to his true price on Betfair also now (Must be at least 15) due to arbers like yourself. You'll rarely see a rick as big as this, whoever has left that 9.8 up is losing thousands.
    I thought I'd broken them at last (I'm into four figures now, I can't see any way the rules could differ but I do remember the Overround Fiasco) but after five minutes, the 9.8 was back.
    It'd be hilarious if that was Smarkets own house API.
  • eekeek Posts: 21,769
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Vaguely a **betting post** although I know nobody was especially interested at the weekend.

    I have discovered that the reason Sunak remains available to lay at 9.8 on Smarkets is that someone has failed to turn their market making API off (or something with the same effect) - so while it looks like only a small amount available, it gets replenished as soon as you take it. About £1.50 profit in it per £100 'invested', or £2 if you take all the profit on the Truss side.

    I am heading for £1k of exposure, about 50% of which is hedged against the 12 to back at Betfair. I may keep going though at some point my bank are going to phone me when their automated scam detection software gets triggered... so, anyway, if anyone else wants a share, it looks like there's plenty.

    I'm as deep as I'd like to go on this (And then some) - but whoever's holding the 9.8 on Smarkets is probably also preventing Rishi from drifting to his true price on Betfair also now (Must be at least 15) due to arbers like yourself. You'll rarely see a rick as big as this, whoever has left that 9.8 up is losing thousands.
    I thought I'd broken them at last (I'm into four figures now, I can't see any way the rules could differ but I do remember the Overround Fiasco) but after five minutes, the 9.8 was back.
    It'd be hilarious if that was Smarkets own house API.
    wouldn't surprise me if it was...
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,934
    Leon said:

    Janan Ganesh in the FT has Woken up



    "It is there, too, in the growing denial that something has gone very wrong with identity politics. When a liberal says, “There is no culture war,” what I hear is: “Please let there be no culture war. Otherwise, I shall have to fall out with my friends, stand up to my children, upset my employees. Or worse, go along with them and feel a coward.” Even if it is true that 2020 will turn out to be peak woke, it is because people — writers, comedians — took a stand. A conflict was recognised, and engaged. Those who looked away at the time don’t get to turn up now and pronounce the whole thing overblown. The poet Robert Frost once defined a liberal as someone who wouldn’t take their own side in a quarrel. It is increasingly a feat to recognise the quarrel.

    "Another liberal parry is to say that cancel culture is a distraction from the economic crisis. And perhaps it is. But then one novelist’s torment was a distraction in the not notably quiet year of 1989. There will always be a reason to dodge a subject. In the end, “salience” aside, what do you think about it?"


    https://www.ft.com/content/8700151d-eaff-44bd-a6ec-aea1895db361

    He is deluded in his forlorn hope that we might have passed Peak Woke. This psychological defence mechanism - a form of denial, because pain - was identified in the Spectator a year ago



    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-

    Saw this yesterday. He's getting a lot of stick in the comments section.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,771

    snip…
    You can delay entropy and decay, but you can't beat them. Of course, it may be different this time.

    Only with input of energy, which is now scarce. Without it entropy will win (and we all level down).

This discussion has been closed.