It’s hard to produce one of these events. They’ve done several all at once, with an election to cover before and Eurovision next week. Remarkable really.
I don’t think it’s possible to shrink the state back toward growth.
Demographics and politics simply forbid it.
We’ve reached the end of the neo-liberal revolution and for Britain in particular it’s delivered this kind of high tax, public squalor, low productivity nightmare.
As the Irishman said, you wouldn’t want to start from here.
No, the only way is growth. Growth through investment. Public and private. Certain in capital, but conceivably in people too.
Demographics is destiny.
The market is like respiration. We can either restrict breathing, or breathe as freely as possible. What we can't do is decide to do something else.
Really great concert . I loved those segments telling us a bit more about Charles . I thought William gave a great speech . The environmental section was really emotional and that version of the Simple Minds classic was fantastic .
I don’t think it’s possible to shrink the state back toward growth.
Demographics and politics simply forbid it.
We’ve reached the end of the neo-liberal revolution and for Britain in particular it’s delivered this kind of high tax, public squalor, low productivity nightmare.
As the Irishman said, you wouldn’t want to start from here.
No, the only way is growth. Growth through investment. Public and private. Certain in capital, but conceivably in people too.
Demographics is destiny.
The market is like respiration. We can either restrict breathing, or breathe as freely as possible. What we can't do is decide to do something else.
Put like that we will always restrict breathing. Or are you proposing an entirely controlled market?
I made it to Tréguier, the next stop on the pilgrimage, late yesterday, just in time to get dinner at the restaurant next to the hotel. Then went straight to bed. I was pretty knackered after another long walk, in pretty filthy weather
It rained for about half the day, and got really heavy in the last hour or so of the walk. I must have looked quite a sorry sight trudging along in the rain; five people stopped to offer me a lift during that last hour!
Today I’ve had a shorter walk to Guingamp, about eighteen miles, but felt rather tired again. I’m not sure if that’s just general fatigue after my fortnight’s exertions, or because of how tough yesterday was, but I was quite slow today
I booked the only AirBnb apartment that had a washing machine as I was dangerously short of clean clothes. It’s a tiny studio flat, but the location is amazing
This is my view from the window; the Norte Dame Basilica of Bon-Secours. I think it’s close enough to spit on!
You are the envy of all you meet! Except perhaps the Pyreneeian toads?
As old country boy, not surprised that country folk (let alone fellow celts) were stopping to see if a seriously soggy stranger might need a lift on a very rainy day.
You appear to be making your own luck - keep it up.
When [Anton] Corbijn presented the concept of the video to [Depeche Mode], which at the time was simply "Dave dressed up as a king, walking around with a deck chair", they initially rejected it. They changed their minds, when he explained that the idea was that the King (Dave) represented "a man with everything in the world, just looking for a quiet place to sit"; a king of no kingdom.
It has occurred to me that whilst unseating Rishi Sunak is a tall (hehe) order, if there's enough internal dissent surrounding growth and taxation, he might be tempted to throw Hunt under a bus.
He could argue that Hunt was brought in to stabilise things, and has done that*, and so now it is time for the next stage, which is a pro-growth plan done properly this time, having set the stage for it. And that that requires a new Chancellor.
Don't think it would wash though. Too obviously a sacking and attempt to save his own skin. I thought sacking Kwarteng and essentially delegating all economic policy to Hunt might have done enough to save Truss, but it didn't.
*never mind if that is true, he could argue it.
All very well, but Rishi is not terribly interested in a pro growth plan. .
Nor was Boris for his premiership until suddenly he is now claimed to have been by his acolytes and he was going to do it before his ousting. And if Lucky is right then Hunt used to be interested in it but then wasn't once appointed.
So if he thought it would be his only option Rishi would suddenly find himself interested in such a plan. He might even be able to sell it if he can say the principle was right it was just incompetently done.
Three problems off the top of my head.
One way of getting the economy growing would be to build more stuff. But as a country, we don't want more stuff built.
Another way to grow the economy would be to import more workers... spot the flaw with that one.
And then there's the whole trade with Eu...(at this point, Romford Constabulary dragged me away from the keyboard for the sake of public order.)
Ultimately, the electorate in general (and the Conservative electorate in particular) are OK with decline, as long as it is gentle and genteel. Deep down, we'd like to be Audrey Fforbes-Hamilton. As a country, we're stuffed as long as we carry on like this, or look for something-for-nothing get rich quick gimmicks, but I don't see the easy sustainable way out.
There isn't one. There's no way to promote productive economic activity over property speculation, or to avoid taxing businesses and earned incomes into oblivion to fund pensions, health and social care, without launching a direct assault on the interests of the grey vote.
There are too many olds, so anyone who does that simply gets rejected at the ballot box. Thus, on we go, circling the plughole.
I couldn't disagree more. We have a corpulent state, gorging itself on public money and ruining the productive part of the economy. Blaming the crinklies for having a marginally better time of it than young people is a distraction - classic divide and rule.
What would you cut?
I would want to drive public spending down (in real terms) to the first Blair premiership levels - as an ambition. So all departments would probably see significant cuts. Within that there are individual programmes and areas of spending that I think are riper for chopping than others, which I can be more detailed about if you're interested?
Specifically which areas would you cut? The biggest increases in spending since Blair has been the NHS, the state pension and public sector defined benefit pensions plus debt interest has gone up from ~£25bn to ~£100bn per year. I think the only other part of government spending that has gone up is defence and that's just barely.
I would be quite comfortable with cutting the NHS. It has far more administrative staff than it seems to have any use for. I also have a personal belief that NICE pays through the nose for the NHS's drugs.
Ok that's one cut, and you're having a laugh about NICE. The NHS has got the most efficient and effective drug buying amongst western countries. It's every other kind of procurement where the NHS is useless.
So that's say £20bn cut, where's the rest going to come from, you're proposing cuts of ca. £150bn to take us back to 2010 levels.
I am not proposing that we return to 2010 levels, I am proposing that we return to 2000 levels.
But you seem very confused as to what you're trying to challenge me about. Do you want me to assign so many billions of cuts to respective Government departments, which is easy, or (as seems more likely) are you looking for specific programmes that you want me to 'cut', so that you can demonstrate how impossible it all is without stealing the food from the mouths of infants?
Ok so you're talking about ~ £250bn in cuts. That's fine but I don't see how you do that without cutting the state pension and debt servicing. The latter is obviously impractical and would require a default and you have previously indicated that cutting old people benefits isn't something you'd do.
Where do the savings come from?
You’re putting words in my mouth. I have not suggested that 'old people benefits' should be given unjustified protection. But the idea behind shrinking the state isn't just to be mean, it is a reallocation of resources and spending power from the unproductive to the productive part of the economy. It would be accompanied by cuts to taxes that would be aimed at radically increasing taxable activity, meaning higher tax revenues in the long term.
Out of interest, why do you think cuts to tax would 'radically increase taxable activity'?
Because that has proven to be the case in the past. Why do you think ROI has 12.5% CT - because they want to get less Corporation Tax or more? The UK also got more Corporation Tax when Osborne cut it.
Oh god...
1. ROI is a small English-speaking economy in the EU that can attract business to headquarter there by offering a reduced CT rate. The UK is a completely different kettle of fish on so many levels; copying the ROI is not an option. 2. The 'Osborne CT cuts led to increased CT take' myth is debunked herehttps://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-did-cutting-corporation-tax-raise-money
It's really quite comedic the vexed pomposity you seem to muster, only back it up by the lamest of sources or just your own utterly baseless pronouncements. Why exactly is the UK economy so different - are we not small? Do we not speak English? Can we not attract businesses to headquarter within the UK? If competition on CT doesn’t attract foreign direct investment, why is it do you think that the US is pushing so hard to eliminate lower rates of CT than its own in the G7?
As for the 'fact check' (surely the most debased media article format in existence these days), it has precisely *zero* content debunking Truss's assertions about Osborne's CT cut, other than reminding us that tax cuts don't take place in a vacuum, which most intelligent people knew anyway.
'Vexed pomposity' Lol.
If you cannot appreciate the differences between the ROI and UK economies I'm unlikely to convince you. But what is seems you are now proposing to fulfil your 'cuts to taxes that would be aimed at radically increasing taxable activity' is actually a race to bottom on CT rates. It's not something that would end well.
As for the 'fact check' you dismiss I am left deciding whether to place my faith in LuckyGuy1983 or the IFS; I chose the IFS.
When [Anton] Corbijn presented the concept of the video to [Depeche Mode], which at the time was simply "Dave dressed up as a king, walking around with a deck chair", they initially rejected it. They changed their minds, when he explained that the idea was that the King (Dave) represented "a man with everything in the world, just looking for a quiet place to sit"; a king of no kingdom.
Thank you for the responses and likes to my article yesterday. The post-match debrief is backstage: if you or anybody else wants to join it please let me know and I will add you. You can post questions there and I will be online in that backstage area between 7pm and 8pm BST on Tuesday March 9th to answer them live: you are cordially invited. IRL I would bring cake, but alas we cannot do that online...
Thanks, I would but I will be in Kefalonia. You just can't get committment these days!
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
Thank you for the responses and likes to my article yesterday. The post-match debrief is backstage: if you or anybody else wants to join it please let me know and I will add you. You can post questions there and I will be online in that backstage area between 7pm and 8pm BST on Tuesday March 9th to answer them live: you are cordially invited. IRL I would bring cake, but alas we cannot do that online...
Thanks, I would but I will be in Kefalonia. You just can't get commitment these days!
Thank you for the responses and likes to my article yesterday. The post-match debrief is backstage: if you or anybody else wants to join it please let me know and I will add you. You can post questions there and I will be online in that backstage area between 7pm and 8pm BST on Tuesday March 9th to answer them live: you are cordially invited. IRL I would bring cake, but alas we cannot do that online...
Thanks, I would but I will be in Kefalonia. You just can't get commitment these days!
Captain Corelli's Mandalorian
The rip-off of that: Captain Corelli's Mandolin, is a very good read actually.
It has occurred to me that whilst unseating Rishi Sunak is a tall (hehe) order, if there's enough internal dissent surrounding growth and taxation, he might be tempted to throw Hunt under a bus.
He could argue that Hunt was brought in to stabilise things, and has done that*, and so now it is time for the next stage, which is a pro-growth plan done properly this time, having set the stage for it. And that that requires a new Chancellor.
Don't think it would wash though. Too obviously a sacking and attempt to save his own skin. I thought sacking Kwarteng and essentially delegating all economic policy to Hunt might have done enough to save Truss, but it didn't.
*never mind if that is true, he could argue it.
All very well, but Rishi is not terribly interested in a pro growth plan. .
Nor was Boris for his premiership until suddenly he is now claimed to have been by his acolytes and he was going to do it before his ousting. And if Lucky is right then Hunt used to be interested in it but then wasn't once appointed.
So if he thought it would be his only option Rishi would suddenly find himself interested in such a plan. He might even be able to sell it if he can say the principle was right it was just incompetently done.
Three problems off the top of my head.
One way of getting the economy growing would be to build more stuff. But as a country, we don't want more stuff built.
Another way to grow the economy would be to import more workers... spot the flaw with that one.
And then there's the whole trade with Eu...(at this point, Romford Constabulary dragged me away from the keyboard for the sake of public order.)
Ultimately, the electorate in general (and the Conservative electorate in particular) are OK with decline, as long as it is gentle and genteel. Deep down, we'd like to be Audrey Fforbes-Hamilton. As a country, we're stuffed as long as we carry on like this, or look for something-for-nothing get rich quick gimmicks, but I don't see the easy sustainable way out.
There isn't one. There's no way to promote productive economic activity over property speculation, or to avoid taxing businesses and earned incomes into oblivion to fund pensions, health and social care, without launching a direct assault on the interests of the grey vote.
There are too many olds, so anyone who does that simply gets rejected at the ballot box. Thus, on we go, circling the plughole.
I couldn't disagree more. We have a corpulent state, gorging itself on public money and ruining the productive part of the economy. Blaming the crinklies for having a marginally better time of it than young people is a distraction - classic divide and rule.
What would you cut?
I would want to drive public spending down (in real terms) to the first Blair premiership levels - as an ambition. So all departments would probably see significant cuts. Within that there are individual programmes and areas of spending that I think are riper for chopping than others, which I can be more detailed about if you're interested?
Specifically which areas would you cut? The biggest increases in spending since Blair has been the NHS, the state pension and public sector defined benefit pensions plus debt interest has gone up from ~£25bn to ~£100bn per year. I think the only other part of government spending that has gone up is defence and that's just barely.
I would be quite comfortable with cutting the NHS. It has far more administrative staff than it seems to have any use for. I also have a personal belief that NICE pays through the nose for the NHS's drugs.
Ok that's one cut, and you're having a laugh about NICE. The NHS has got the most efficient and effective drug buying amongst western countries. It's every other kind of procurement where the NHS is useless.
So that's say £20bn cut, where's the rest going to come from, you're proposing cuts of ca. £150bn to take us back to 2010 levels.
I am not proposing that we return to 2010 levels, I am proposing that we return to 2000 levels.
But you seem very confused as to what you're trying to challenge me about. Do you want me to assign so many billions of cuts to respective Government departments, which is easy, or (as seems more likely) are you looking for specific programmes that you want me to 'cut', so that you can demonstrate how impossible it all is without stealing the food from the mouths of infants?
Ok so you're talking about ~ £250bn in cuts. That's fine but I don't see how you do that without cutting the state pension and debt servicing. The latter is obviously impractical and would require a default and you have previously indicated that cutting old people benefits isn't something you'd do.
Where do the savings come from?
You’re putting words in my mouth. I have not suggested that 'old people benefits' should be given unjustified protection. But the idea behind shrinking the state isn't just to be mean, it is a reallocation of resources and spending power from the unproductive to the productive part of the economy. It would be accompanied by cuts to taxes that would be aimed at radically increasing taxable activity, meaning higher tax revenues in the long term.
Out of interest, why do you think cuts to tax would 'radically increase taxable activity'?
Because that has proven to be the case in the past. Why do you think ROI has 12.5% CT - because they want to get less Corporation Tax or more? The UK also got more Corporation Tax when Osborne cut it.
Oh god...
1. ROI is a small English-speaking economy in the EU that can attract business to headquarter there by offering a reduced CT rate. The UK is a completely different kettle of fish on so many levels; copying the ROI is not an option. 2. The 'Osborne CT cuts led to increased CT take' myth is debunked herehttps://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-did-cutting-corporation-tax-raise-money
It's really quite comedic the vexed pomposity you seem to muster, only back it up by the lamest of sources or just your own utterly baseless pronouncements. Why exactly is the UK economy so different - are we not small? Do we not speak English? Can we not attract businesses to headquarter within the UK? If competition on CT doesn’t attract foreign direct investment, why is it do you think that the US is pushing so hard to eliminate lower rates of CT than its own in the G7?
As for the 'fact check' (surely the most debased media article format in existence these days), it has precisely *zero* content debunking Truss's assertions about Osborne's CT cut, other than reminding us that tax cuts don't take place in a vacuum, which most intelligent people knew anyway.
'Vexed pomposity' Lol.
If you cannot appreciate the differences between the ROI and UK economies I'm unlikely to convince you. But what is seems you are now proposing to fulfil your 'cuts to taxes that would be aimed at radically increasing taxable activity' is actually a race to bottom on CT rates. It's not something that would end well.
As for the 'fact check' you dismiss I am left deciding whether to place my faith in LuckyGuy1983 or the IFS; I chose the IFS.
The main difference between Ireland and Britain in terms of Foreign Direct Investment is that Ireland seems to really understand that the rest of the world doesn't owe it a living, and it works hard to attract investment. They know what it's like to be dirt fucking poor, with only peat - soggy proto-coal - as a natural resource, and they much prefer being able to afford German cars and underfloor heating.
Obviously the low rate of Corporation Tax is part of that, but it's only part of it - infrastructure investment, education, government commitment, are arguably much more important factors. I'm fairly confident that simply cutting corporation tax alone wouldn't suddenly bring a rush of foreign direct investment.
I've always thought that the pharmaceutical sector was one of the strongest industries in the UK, so I was gobsmacked to discover recently that Irish pharmaceutical exports were more than double those from the UK. That feels like a stark illustration of how the UK has just assumed that existing areas of strength will remain, and don't have to be nurtured.
Look also at the shambles over the years of wind turbine manufacture, or what is happening now to opportunities with small modular nuclear reactors, or battery factories.
That's not to say Ireland is perfect - they're continuing to make a right hames of opportunities for offshore wind, for example - but people need to pay more attention to what Ireland does than to just look at the tax rates and draw simplistic conclusions.
Didn't see the concert myself (was travelling back to the town of the venue), but an old friend (diehard anti-Royalist, muso, excellent musician himself and not a person to offer praise lightly) described it as 'seriously impressive' and 'a middle finger to the rest of the world'. So that's a good assessment coming from him.
From my own cherished copy of "The Inaugural Book of 1973" chronicling the 2nd presidential swearing of Richard Nixon, including program for "The Inaugural Concerts"
American Music Concert Masters of Ceremonies - Frank Sinatra, Bob Hope Performers - Vickie Carr, Mike Curb Congregation, Sammy Davis Jr, Bob Hope, Ray Stevens, Roger Williams, Les Brown Orchestra
Inaugural Youth Concert Master of Ceremonies - Mike Curb Performers - Solomon Burke, Mike Curb Congregation, The Mob, Jimmy Osmond, Tommy Roe, Laurie Lee Schafer, Ray Stevens, The Sylvers, Don Costa Orchestra
We’ve had Covid and Ukraine and now US Republicans are threatening to cause a global calamity by forcing a default by refusing to raise the debt ceiling unless their laundry list of hostage demands are met .
Funnily they never had a problem raising the debt ceiling when Trump was in office but all of a sudden are worried about the national debt !
Quite how anyone with a functioning brain in the USA continues to vote for these economic terrorists is beyond me .
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
On the subject of 'anecdotals', I went to a neighbourhood coronation party today. There were some people in their 20's and I have to say that they seemed reassuringly sane. They didn't seem woke in any way. Two of them were trying to make careers in law, the situation sounded the same as it was 20 years or so ago (I didn't go in to law but quite a few friends did). The general consensus opinion was good riddance to Boris and Truss, Sunak was doing well, and the next general election will probably be more like 1992 than 1997.
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
The spares get hung out to dry and the media get to work on them.
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
She seemed to do pretty good job as her little brother's keeper. Sorta like great aunt Anne?
As for EVIII, the Great British Public thought that HE was the bees knees (unlike many in more privileged circles) back when he was Prince of Wales.
And (lest we forget) only few short years ago, Prince Harry was Hero of the Nation AND (in public anyway) the Firm.
I don’t think it’s possible to shrink the state back toward growth.
Demographics and politics simply forbid it.
We’ve reached the end of the neo-liberal revolution and for Britain in particular it’s delivered this kind of high tax, public squalor, low productivity nightmare.
As the Irishman said, you wouldn’t want to start from here.
No, the only way is growth. Growth through investment. Public and private. Certain in capital, but conceivably in people too.
Demographics is destiny.
The market is like respiration. We can either restrict breathing, or breathe as freely as possible. What we can't do is decide to do something else.
Government isn't the only thing that restricts growth however. Monopoly power, externalities and liquidity traps can also do that.
The Cameron/Osborne Tories could have seemed in tune with that concert, just as they got away with not looking entirely out of place at the Olympic ceremony in 2012. But that was not an event that sits well with the Sunak/Anderson/Braverman Tories. And therein lies their problem.
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
She seemed to do pretty good job as her little brother's keeper. Sorta like great aunt Anne?
As for EVIII, the Great British Public thought that HE was the bees knees (unlike many in more privileged circles) back when he was Prince of Wales.
And (lest we forget) only few short years ago, Prince Harry was Hero of the Nation AND (in public anyway) the Firm.
(He's still narrowly the least awful of the lot of them. Especially when you balance the press about him from the UK with what the press in the rest of the world have to say about his brother.)
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
On the subject of 'anecdotals', I went to a neighbourhood coronation party today. There were some people in their 20's and I have to say that they seemed reassuringly sane. They didn't seem woke in any way. Two of them were trying to make careers in law, the situation sounded the same as it was 20 years or so ago (I didn't go in to law but quite a few friends did). The general consensus opinion was good riddance to Boris and Truss, Sunak was doing well, and the next general election will probably be more like 1992 than 1997.
this forum is so out of touch with the world I live in
My street had no party, there was no bunting, anywhere close to me.
The people on my street are a mix of security guards, labourers on construction sites in town, workers in supermarkets and a couple who work at the Kellogg's factory.
None of them tried to make a career anywhere, they were dealt what they were given.
The disconnect between how many on here experience life from what millions experience day to day is utterly remarkable and those on here seem utterly blind to that reality for the normal person in this country.
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
On the subject of 'anecdotals', I went to a neighbourhood coronation party today. There were some people in their 20's and I have to say that they seemed reassuringly sane. They didn't seem woke in any way. Two of them were trying to make careers in law, the situation sounded the same as it was 20 years or so ago (I didn't go in to law but quite a few friends did). The general consensus opinion was good riddance to Boris and Truss, Sunak was doing well, and the next general election will probably be more like 1992 than 1997.
this forum is so out of touch with the world I live in
My street had no party, there was no bunting, anywhere close to me.
The people on my street are a mix of security guards, labourers on construction sites in town, workers in supermarkets and a couple who work at the Kellogg's factory.
None of them tried to make a career anywhere, they were dealt what they were given.
The disconnect between how many on here experience life from what millions experience day to day is utterly remarkable and those on here seem utterly blind to that reality for the normal person in this country.
It's out of touch with my experience too.
I went out today, if you'd been dropped here from space you'd have assumed it was just any other day of the year.
We're at a point now where anyone who is vaguely left wing is considered "insane". This country is so completely in the dumps and it won't change until this lot lose and take their out of touch ideas with them.
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
She seemed to do pretty good job as her little brother's keeper. Sorta like great aunt Anne?
As for EVIII, the Great British Public thought that HE was the bees knees (unlike many in more privileged circles) back when he was Prince of Wales.
And (lest we forget) only few short years ago, Prince Harry was Hero of the Nation AND (in public anyway) the Firm.
That may be so, but, the British Public's good opinion once lost, is lost forever, to paraphrase a great observer of the British social condition.
It has occurred to me that whilst unseating Rishi Sunak is a tall (hehe) order, if there's enough internal dissent surrounding growth and taxation, he might be tempted to throw Hunt under a bus.
He could argue that Hunt was brought in to stabilise things, and has done that*, and so now it is time for the next stage, which is a pro-growth plan done properly this time, having set the stage for it. And that that requires a new Chancellor.
Don't think it would wash though. Too obviously a sacking and attempt to save his own skin. I thought sacking Kwarteng and essentially delegating all economic policy to Hunt might have done enough to save Truss, but it didn't.
*never mind if that is true, he could argue it.
All very well, but Rishi is not terribly interested in a pro growth plan. .
Nor was Boris for his premiership until suddenly he is now claimed to have been by his acolytes and he was going to do it before his ousting. And if Lucky is right then Hunt used to be interested in it but then wasn't once appointed.
So if he thought it would be his only option Rishi would suddenly find himself interested in such a plan. He might even be able to sell it if he can say the principle was right it was just incompetently done.
Three problems off the top of my head.
One way of getting the economy growing would be to build more stuff. But as a country, we don't want more stuff built.
Another way to grow the economy would be to import more workers... spot the flaw with that one.
And then there's the whole trade with Eu...(at this point, Romford Constabulary dragged me away from the keyboard for the sake of public order.)
Ultimately, the electorate in general (and the Conservative electorate in particular) are OK with decline, as long as it is gentle and genteel. Deep down, we'd like to be Audrey Fforbes-Hamilton. As a country, we're stuffed as long as we carry on like this, or look for something-for-nothing get rich quick gimmicks, but I don't see the easy sustainable way out.
There isn't one. There's no way to promote productive economic activity over property speculation, or to avoid taxing businesses and earned incomes into oblivion to fund pensions, health and social care, without launching a direct assault on the interests of the grey vote.
There are too many olds, so anyone who does that simply gets rejected at the ballot box. Thus, on we go, circling the plughole.
I couldn't disagree more. We have a corpulent state, gorging itself on public money and ruining the productive part of the economy. Blaming the crinklies for having a marginally better time of it than young people is a distraction - classic divide and rule.
What would you cut?
I would want to drive public spending down (in real terms) to the first Blair premiership levels - as an ambition. So all departments would probably see significant cuts. Within that there are individual programmes and areas of spending that I think are riper for chopping than others, which I can be more detailed about if you're interested?
Specifically which areas would you cut? The biggest increases in spending since Blair has been the NHS, the state pension and public sector defined benefit pensions plus debt interest has gone up from ~£25bn to ~£100bn per year. I think the only other part of government spending that has gone up is defence and that's just barely.
I would be quite comfortable with cutting the NHS. It has far more administrative staff than it seems to have any use for. I also have a personal belief that NICE pays through the nose for the NHS's drugs.
NICE is very effective at driving down the prices of drugs. Drug supply to the NHS is among the cheapest in the developed world
We're at a point now where anyone who is vaguely left wing is considered "insane". This country is so completely in the dumps and it won't change until this lot lose and take their out of touch ideas with them.
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
On the subject of 'anecdotals', I went to a neighbourhood coronation party today. There were some people in their 20's and I have to say that they seemed reassuringly sane. They didn't seem woke in any way. Two of them were trying to make careers in law, the situation sounded the same as it was 20 years or so ago (I didn't go in to law but quite a few friends did). The general consensus opinion was good riddance to Boris and Truss, Sunak was doing well, and the next general election will probably be more like 1992 than 1997.
this forum is so out of touch with the world I live in
My street had no party, there was no bunting, anywhere close to me.
The people on my street are a mix of security guards, labourers on construction sites in town, workers in supermarkets and a couple who work at the Kellogg's factory.
None of them tried to make a career anywhere, they were dealt what they were given.
The disconnect between how many on here experience life from what millions experience day to day is utterly remarkable and those on here seem utterly blind to that reality for the normal person in this country.
It wasn't actually a party on my street though, it was a party on my parents street. What you are describing though is pretty similar to the parents at my son's school, it is not that far away from my day to day life. I suppose you always seek out the people with similar interests to you
This is basically a multi-million pound advert for the Commonwealth, on a global stage.
He won't say it, but I think Charles sees it as his particular mission to welcome Ireland into the Commonwealth.
The presence of the Taoiseach, President of Ireland and Sinn Fein First Minister-elect at the Coronation is a small step towards that goal, as will the coming State visit.
The possibility of the Royals successfully pulling off a charm offensive to Ireland that helps to build a more positive relationship between Britain and Ireland - which Commonwealth membership would be a strong symbolic signal - is one of the few things that the Royal family could actually achieve.
I’ve just watched the old Michael Collins movie with Liam Neeson. Goodness Devalera was a murderous shit.
Thank you for the responses and likes to my article yesterday. The post-match debrief is backstage: if you or anybody else wants to join it please let me know and I will add you. You can post questions there and I will be online in that backstage area between 7pm and 8pm BST on Tuesday March 9th to answer them live: you are cordially invited. IRL I would bring cake, but alas we cannot do that online...
Thanks, I would but I will be in Kefalonia. You just can't get committment these days!
You don't have to be there on Tuesday. I can add you now, you can post any questions or comments there at any time between now and then, and I'll answer them textually Tuesday night. Is that OK?
It has occurred to me that whilst unseating Rishi Sunak is a tall (hehe) order, if there's enough internal dissent surrounding growth and taxation, he might be tempted to throw Hunt under a bus.
He could argue that Hunt was brought in to stabilise things, and has done that*, and so now it is time for the next stage, which is a pro-growth plan done properly this time, having set the stage for it. And that that requires a new Chancellor.
Don't think it would wash though. Too obviously a sacking and attempt to save his own skin. I thought sacking Kwarteng and essentially delegating all economic policy to Hunt might have done enough to save Truss, but it didn't.
*never mind if that is true, he could argue it.
All very well, but Rishi is not terribly interested in a pro growth plan. .
Nor was Boris for his premiership until suddenly he is now claimed to have been by his acolytes and he was going to do it before his ousting. And if Lucky is right then Hunt used to be interested in it but then wasn't once appointed.
So if he thought it would be his only option Rishi would suddenly find himself interested in such a plan. He might even be able to sell it if he can say the principle was right it was just incompetently done.
Three problems off the top of my head.
One way of getting the economy growing would be to build more stuff. But as a country, we don't want more stuff built.
Another way to grow the economy would be to import more workers... spot the flaw with that one.
And then there's the whole trade with Eu...(at this point, Romford Constabulary dragged me away from the keyboard for the sake of public order.)
Ultimately, the electorate in general (and the Conservative electorate in particular) are OK with decline, as long as it is gentle and genteel. Deep down, we'd like to be Audrey Fforbes-Hamilton. As a country, we're stuffed as long as we carry on like this, or look for something-for-nothing get rich quick gimmicks, but I don't see the easy sustainable way out.
There isn't one. There's no way to promote productive economic activity over property speculation, or to avoid taxing businesses and earned incomes into oblivion to fund pensions, health and social care, without launching a direct assault on the interests of the grey vote.
There are too many olds, so anyone who does that simply gets rejected at the ballot box. Thus, on we go, circling the plughole.
I couldn't disagree more. We have a corpulent state, gorging itself on public money and ruining the productive part of the economy. Blaming the crinklies for having a marginally better time of it than young people is a distraction - classic divide and rule.
What would you cut?
I would want to drive public spending down (in real terms) to the first Blair premiership levels - as an ambition. So all departments would probably see significant cuts. Within that there are individual programmes and areas of spending that I think are riper for chopping than others, which I can be more detailed about if you're interested?
Specifically which areas would you cut? The biggest increases in spending since Blair has been the NHS, the state pension and public sector defined benefit pensions plus debt interest has gone up from ~£25bn to ~£100bn per year. I think the only other part of government spending that has gone up is defence and that's just barely.
I would be quite comfortable with cutting the NHS. It has far more administrative staff than it seems to have any use for. I also have a personal belief that NICE pays through the nose for the NHS's drugs.
Ok that's one cut, and you're having a laugh about NICE. The NHS has got the most efficient and effective drug buying amongst western countries. It's every other kind of procurement where the NHS is useless.
So that's say £20bn cut, where's the rest going to come from, you're proposing cuts of ca. £150bn to take us back to 2010 levels.
I am not proposing that we return to 2010 levels, I am proposing that we return to 2000 levels.
But you seem very confused as to what you're trying to challenge me about. Do you want me to assign so many billions of cuts to respective Government departments, which is easy, or (as seems more likely) are you looking for specific programmes that you want me to 'cut', so that you can demonstrate how impossible it all is without stealing the food from the mouths of infants?
Ok so you're talking about ~ £250bn in cuts. That's fine but I don't see how you do that without cutting the state pension and debt servicing. The latter is obviously impractical and would require a default and you have previously indicated that cutting old people benefits isn't something you'd do.
Where do the savings come from?
You’re putting words in my mouth. I have not suggested that 'old people benefits' should be given unjustified protection. But the idea behind shrinking the state isn't just to be mean, it is a reallocation of resources and spending power from the unproductive to the productive part of the economy. It would be accompanied by cuts to taxes that would be aimed at radically increasing taxable activity, meaning higher tax revenues in the long term.
Out of interest, why do you think cuts to tax would 'radically increase taxable activity'?
Because that has proven to be the case in the past. Why do you think ROI has 12.5% CT - because they want to get less Corporation Tax or more? The UK also got more Corporation Tax when Osborne cut it.
Oh god...
1. ROI is a small English-speaking economy in the EU that can attract business to headquarter there by offering a reduced CT rate. The UK is a completely different kettle of fish on so many levels; copying the ROI is not an option. 2. The 'Osborne CT cuts led to increased CT take' myth is debunked herehttps://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-did-cutting-corporation-tax-raise-money
It's really quite comedic the vexed pomposity you seem to muster, only back it up by the lamest of sources or just your own utterly baseless pronouncements. Why exactly is the UK economy so different - are we not small? Do we not speak English? Can we not attract businesses to headquarter within the UK? If competition on CT doesn’t attract foreign direct investment, why is it do you think that the US is pushing so hard to eliminate lower rates of CT than its own in the G7?
As for the 'fact check' (surely the most debased media article format in existence these days), it has precisely *zero* content debunking Truss's assertions about Osborne's CT cut, other than reminding us that tax cuts don't take place in a vacuum, which most intelligent people knew anyway.
'Vexed pomposity' Lol.
If you cannot appreciate the differences between the ROI and UK economies I'm unlikely to convince you. But what is seems you are now proposing to fulfil your 'cuts to taxes that would be aimed at radically increasing taxable activity' is actually a race to bottom on CT rates. It's not something that would end well.
As for the 'fact check' you dismiss I am left deciding whether to place my faith in LuckyGuy1983 or the IFS; I chose the IFS.
The main difference between Ireland and Britain in terms of Foreign Direct Investment is that Ireland seems to really understand that the rest of the world doesn't owe it a living, and it works hard to attract investment. They know what it's like to be dirt fucking poor, with only peat - soggy proto-coal - as a natural resource, and they much prefer being able to afford German cars and underfloor heating.
Obviously the low rate of Corporation Tax is part of that, but it's only part of it - infrastructure investment, education, government commitment, are arguably much more important factors. I'm fairly confident that simply cutting corporation tax alone wouldn't suddenly bring a rush of foreign direct investment.
I've always thought that the pharmaceutical sector was one of the strongest industries in the UK, so I was gobsmacked to discover recently that Irish pharmaceutical exports were more than double those from the UK. That feels like a stark illustration of how the UK has just assumed that existing areas of strength will remain, and don't have to be nurtured.
Look also at the shambles over the years of wind turbine manufacture, or what is happening now to opportunities with small modular nuclear reactors, or battery factories.
That's not to say Ireland is perfect - they're continuing to make a right hames of opportunities for offshore wind, for example - but people need to pay more attention to what Ireland does than to just look at the tax rates and draw simplistic conclusions.
Ireland was a bit lucky with pharma but they have exploited it well. Back in the 1990s Immunex was looking to build a biological manufacturing facility. No one could really be faffed because it was for an unapproved product. Ireland wanted to get jobs into Cork for political reasons so offers a *very* generous incentive package.
And the rest is history.
(Ireland doesn’t invent drugs. They have a bunch of inverted US companies that claim to be Irish for tax reasons. And they have a great manufacturing set up).
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
This is basically a multi-million pound advert for the Commonwealth, on a global stage.
He won't say it, but I think Charles sees it as his particular mission to welcome Ireland into the Commonwealth.
The presence of the Taoiseach, President of Ireland and Sinn Fein First Minister-elect at the Coronation is a small step towards that goal, as will the coming State visit.
The possibility of the Royals successfully pulling off a charm offensive to Ireland that helps to build a more positive relationship between Britain and Ireland - which Commonwealth membership would be a strong symbolic signal - is one of the few things that the Royal family could actually achieve.
I’ve just watched the old Michael Collins movie with Liam Neeson. Goodness Devalera was a murderous shit.
Not that I'm a big Dev fan, FAR from it, but that movie and the Tim Pat Collins book it was based on, were hatchet jobs.
The movie in particular is more parody than history.
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
Charlotte will be like Anne. I worry about Louis.
What kid needs is twin little brothers: Dewey and Huey. Already got Cousin Archie!
As for Big Sis, I prophesy more than one generation of royals will be entangled in . . . Charlotte's Web . . .
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
On the subject of 'anecdotals', I went to a neighbourhood coronation party today. There were some people in their 20's and I have to say that they seemed reassuringly sane. They didn't seem woke in any way. Two of them were trying to make careers in law, the situation sounded the same as it was 20 years or so ago (I didn't go in to law but quite a few friends did). The general consensus opinion was good riddance to Boris and Truss, Sunak was doing well, and the next general election will probably be more like 1992 than 1997.
this forum is so out of touch with the world I live in
My street had no party, there was no bunting, anywhere close to me.
The people on my street are a mix of security guards, labourers on construction sites in town, workers in supermarkets and a couple who work at the Kellogg's factory.
None of them tried to make a career anywhere, they were dealt what they were given.
The disconnect between how many on here experience life from what millions experience day to day is utterly remarkable and those on here seem utterly blind to that reality for the normal person in this country.
What you describe is what life is like for a large number of people, but not the majority.
Matthew Goodwin seems to be shocked that since Boris Johnson - a leader so ideologically bankrupt he decided which side to support on Brexit at the last minute - that the Tories don't actually have any ideas and so have no interest or ability to implement anything Goodwin thinks they should do.
This was all quite obvious since the day Johnson came in, that we would end up where we are now. But apparently not to distinguished "academic" Matthew Goodwin who thought the Tories actually had some genuine ideas and ways to achieve them.
Thank you for the responses and likes to my article yesterday. The post-match debrief is backstage: if you or anybody else wants to join it please let me know and I will add you. You can post questions there and I will be online in that backstage area between 7pm and 8pm BST on Tuesday March 9th to answer them live: you are cordially invited. IRL I would bring cake, but alas we cannot do that online...
Thanks, I would but I will be in Kefalonia. You just can't get committment these days!
You don't have to be there on Tuesday. I can add you now, you can post any questions or comments there at any time between now and then, and I'll answer them textually Tuesday night. Is that OK?
Yes, I'll have a look. Thanks again for your thread header.
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
On the subject of 'anecdotals', I went to a neighbourhood coronation party today. There were some people in their 20's and I have to say that they seemed reassuringly sane. They didn't seem woke in any way. Two of them were trying to make careers in law, the situation sounded the same as it was 20 years or so ago (I didn't go in to law but quite a few friends did). The general consensus opinion was good riddance to Boris and Truss, Sunak was doing well, and the next general election will probably be more like 1992 than 1997.
this forum is so out of touch with the world I live in
My street had no party, there was no bunting, anywhere close to me.
The people on my street are a mix of security guards, labourers on construction sites in town, workers in supermarkets and a couple who work at the Kellogg's factory.
None of them tried to make a career anywhere, they were dealt what they were given.
The disconnect between how many on here experience life from what millions experience day to day is utterly remarkable and those on here seem utterly blind to that reality for the normal person in this country.
What you describe is what life is like for a large number of people, but not the majority.
I think you might need a citation for that.
There is a significant sink estate underclass that doesn't have a voice. Fortunately for the Tories they don't vote. Add to that renting and mortgaged struggling working families and the number becomes ever bigger. I have no idea of the figure but how does 50% plus sound?
Matthew Goodwin seems to be shocked that since Boris Johnson - a leader so ideologically bankrupt he decided which side to support on Brexit at the last minute - that the Tories don't actually have any ideas and so have no interest or ability to implement anything Goodwin thinks they should do.
This was all quite obvious since the day Johnson came in, that we would end up where we are now. But apparently not to distinguished "academic" Matthew Goodwin who thought the Tories actually had some genuine ideas and ways to achieve them.
He is an idiot.
As far as I can tell Goodwin is simply a commentator on politics. He doesn't have an agenda of his own.
Matthew Goodwin seems to be shocked that since Boris Johnson - a leader so ideologically bankrupt he decided which side to support on Brexit at the last minute - that the Tories don't actually have any ideas and so have no interest or ability to implement anything Goodwin thinks they should do.
This was all quite obvious since the day Johnson came in, that we would end up where we are now. But apparently not to distinguished "academic" Matthew Goodwin who thought the Tories actually had some genuine ideas and ways to achieve them.
He is an idiot.
As far as I can tell Goodwin is simply a commentator on politics. He doesn't have an agenda of his own.
That's like saying Putin just wants peace. I've met Goodwin (briefly). The ambition is dripping off him. He's one of the best (British) analysts of his generation but he makes the fatal mistake of the analyst in thinking he can change things. His move from analysis to advocacy is like watching Anakin become Vader, made even worse by his dress sense becoming monochromatic: black jacket, white shirt, trim waisted black trousers and polished shoes is a good look for a man, but coupled with his gleaming-eyed intensity it's A BIT WORRYING. Read his stuff: he's trying to deal himself in and I think he's got a chance. Think Daniel Hannan with a hair transplant and without the literary references.
This is basically a multi-million pound advert for the Commonwealth, on a global stage.
He won't say it, but I think Charles sees it as his particular mission to welcome Ireland into the Commonwealth.
The presence of the Taoiseach, President of Ireland and Sinn Fein First Minister-elect at the Coronation is a small step towards that goal, as will the coming State visit.
The possibility of the Royals successfully pulling off a charm offensive to Ireland that helps to build a more positive relationship between Britain and Ireland - which Commonwealth membership would be a strong symbolic signal - is one of the few things that the Royal family could actually achieve.
That would be a coup. But it’s difficult to see how why the Irish Republic would join the Commonwealth. Too much history in the way.
I would prefer it if we strengthened the British-Irish council.
The difference between the Commonwealth and the British-Irish council is that the latter is a matter for ministers, who don't seem to grasp the importance of the relationship with Ireland, while the Commonwealth is the one thing the Royal family have some influence over, and they seem willing to devote time and effort to the relationship with Ireland.
This Republican is willing to wish them the best of luck, in the knowledge that they'll need it.
Matthew Goodwin seems to be shocked that since Boris Johnson - a leader so ideologically bankrupt he decided which side to support on Brexit at the last minute - that the Tories don't actually have any ideas and so have no interest or ability to implement anything Goodwin thinks they should do.
This was all quite obvious since the day Johnson came in, that we would end up where we are now. But apparently not to distinguished "academic" Matthew Goodwin who thought the Tories actually had some genuine ideas and ways to achieve them.
He is an idiot.
As far as I can tell Goodwin is simply a commentator on politics. He doesn't have an agenda of his own.
Goodwin has been radicalised into an “alt-right” idiot by social media attention.
Went for a drink in Peckham with a friend of my wife and her partner this afternoon. I haven't really talked about politics with him before - I know he voted for Brexit and the Tories and his partner is my wife's oldest friend so I kind of steered clear of anything controversial in the past. So I was quite surprised when he brought it up and told me that he regretted voting for Brexit, which had been rubbish, and that the Tories were useless, the country was going backwards, he liked Keir Starmer a lot and thought that Labour knew what they were doing and would bring kindness back to British politics. I was like, OK. I do think things have shifted.
On the subject of 'anecdotals', I went to a neighbourhood coronation party today. There were some people in their 20's and I have to say that they seemed reassuringly sane. They didn't seem woke in any way. Two of them were trying to make careers in law, the situation sounded the same as it was 20 years or so ago (I didn't go in to law but quite a few friends did). The general consensus opinion was good riddance to Boris and Truss, Sunak was doing well, and the next general election will probably be more like 1992 than 1997.
this forum is so out of touch with the world I live in
My street had no party, there was no bunting, anywhere close to me.
The people on my street are a mix of security guards, labourers on construction sites in town, workers in supermarkets and a couple who work at the Kellogg's factory.
None of them tried to make a career anywhere, they were dealt what they were given.
The disconnect between how many on here experience life from what millions experience day to day is utterly remarkable and those on here seem utterly blind to that reality for the normal person in this country.
What you describe is what life is like for a large number of people, but not the majority.
It is also testament to the main factor (albeit not the only important one) that causes enduring poverty: being bereft of ambition or self-improvement.
This is basically a multi-million pound advert for the Commonwealth, on a global stage.
He won't say it, but I think Charles sees it as his particular mission to welcome Ireland into the Commonwealth.
The presence of the Taoiseach, President of Ireland and Sinn Fein First Minister-elect at the Coronation is a small step towards that goal, as will the coming State visit.
The possibility of the Royals successfully pulling off a charm offensive to Ireland that helps to build a more positive relationship between Britain and Ireland - which Commonwealth membership would be a strong symbolic signal - is one of the few things that the Royal family could actually achieve.
I’ve just watched the old Michael Collins movie with Liam Neeson. Goodness Devalera was a murderous shit.
Devalera was the only head of government in the world that sent commiserations to Germany on the death of the Fuhrer. That just tells you what an English-hating c*nt he was.
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
Charlotte will be like Anne. I worry about Louis.
I generally refrain from commenting on kids & parenting, but on wills & kates spares, I recon they’re making a mistake publishing photos / including them in official engagements.
W&K should design their lives so they’re entirely private citizens. Don’t feed the media/public appetite at all. Make it clear to the media & public that they’re going to be normal kids with normal lives. Use lawyers to enforce it.
Obviously, at home, treat them all 3 of them fairly, but make them understand they have different futures ahead of them. 2&3 have freedom & privacy that the heir wont ever have. Lots of options for careers, etc. It’s the best of the bad parenting options W&K have, imo.
The way they’re going, it does seem grimly inevitable that 2&3 will end up having a tragic life, at least as it is represented in the media. I genuinely hope the bastards don’t get to them.
This is basically a multi-million pound advert for the Commonwealth, on a global stage.
He won't say it, but I think Charles sees it as his particular mission to welcome Ireland into the Commonwealth.
The presence of the Taoiseach, President of Ireland and Sinn Fein First Minister-elect at the Coronation is a small step towards that goal, as will the coming State visit.
The possibility of the Royals successfully pulling off a charm offensive to Ireland that helps to build a more positive relationship between Britain and Ireland - which Commonwealth membership would be a strong symbolic signal - is one of the few things that the Royal family could actually achieve.
I’ve just watched the old Michael Collins movie with Liam Neeson. Goodness Devalera was a murderous shit.
Devalera was the only head of government in the world that sent commiserations to Germany on the death of the Fuhrer. That just tells you what an English-hating c*nt he was.
"In 1966, the Dublin Jewish community arranged the planting and dedication of the Éamon de Valera Forest in Israel, near Nazareth, in recognition of his support for Ireland's Jews.[100]"
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
Charlotte will be like Anne. I worry about Louis.
I generally refrain from commenting on kids & parenting, but on wills & kates spares, I recon they’re making a mistake publishing photos / including them in official engagements.
W&K should design their lives so they’re entirely private citizens. Don’t feed the media/public appetite at all. Make it clear to the media & public that they’re going to be normal kids with normal lives. Use lawyers to enforce it.
Obviously, at home, treat them all 3 of them fairly, but make them understand they have different futures ahead of them. 2&3 have freedom & privacy that the heir wont ever have. Lots of options for careers, etc. It’s the best of the bad parenting options W&K have, imo.
The way they’re going, it does seem grimly inevitable that 2&3 will end up having a tragic life, at least as it is represented in the media. I genuinely hope the bastards don’t get to them.
This could all be avoided if we become a republic!
There’s an emerging feeling that it was all a bit rubbish, a damp sermon that resonated with all too few. Today was better, doing the gardening, down the pub in the sunshine, having a barbecue. The Best of British Bank Holiday Sunday.
It has occurred to me that whilst unseating Rishi Sunak is a tall (hehe) order, if there's enough internal dissent surrounding growth and taxation, he might be tempted to throw Hunt under a bus.
He could argue that Hunt was brought in to stabilise things, and has done that*, and so now it is time for the next stage, which is a pro-growth plan done properly this time, having set the stage for it. And that that requires a new Chancellor.
Don't think it would wash though. Too obviously a sacking and attempt to save his own skin. I thought sacking Kwarteng and essentially delegating all economic policy to Hunt might have done enough to save Truss, but it didn't.
*never mind if that is true, he could argue it.
All very well, but Rishi is not terribly interested in a pro growth plan. .
Nor was Boris for his premiership until suddenly he is now claimed to have been by his acolytes and he was going to do it before his ousting. And if Lucky is right then Hunt used to be interested in it but then wasn't once appointed.
So if he thought it would be his only option Rishi would suddenly find himself interested in such a plan. He might even be able to sell it if he can say the principle was right it was just incompetently done.
Three problems off the top of my head.
One way of getting the economy growing would be to build more stuff. But as a country, we don't want more stuff built.
Another way to grow the economy would be to import more workers... spot the flaw with that one.
And then there's the whole trade with Eu...(at this point, Romford Constabulary dragged me away from the keyboard for the sake of public order.)
Ultimately, the electorate in general (and the Conservative electorate in particular) are OK with decline, as long as it is gentle and genteel. Deep down, we'd like to be Audrey Fforbes-Hamilton. As a country, we're stuffed as long as we carry on like this, or look for something-for-nothing get rich quick gimmicks, but I don't see the easy sustainable way out.
There isn't one. There's no way to promote productive economic activity over property speculation, or to avoid taxing businesses and earned incomes into oblivion to fund pensions, health and social care, without launching a direct assault on the interests of the grey vote.
There are too many olds, so anyone who does that simply gets rejected at the ballot box. Thus, on we go, circling the plughole.
I couldn't disagree more. We have a corpulent state, gorging itself on public money and ruining the productive part of the economy. Blaming the crinklies for having a marginally better time of it than young people is a distraction - classic divide and rule.
What would you cut?
I would want to drive public spending down (in real terms) to the first Blair premiership levels - as an ambition. So all departments would probably see significant cuts. Within that there are individual programmes and areas of spending that I think are riper for chopping than others, which I can be more detailed about if you're interested?
Specifically which areas would you cut? The biggest increases in spending since Blair has been the NHS, the state pension and public sector defined benefit pensions plus debt interest has gone up from ~£25bn to ~£100bn per year. I think the only other part of government spending that has gone up is defence and that's just barely.
I would be quite comfortable with cutting the NHS. It has far more administrative staff than it seems to have any use for. I also have a personal belief that NICE pays through the nose for the NHS's drugs.
NICE is very effective at driving down the prices of drugs. Drug supply to the NHS is among the cheapest in the developed world
Yes, LuckyGuy is utterly misguided regarding NICE. It's true that the NHS does overpay for a number of generic drugs, but the responsibility for that lies elsewhere.
This is basically a multi-million pound advert for the Commonwealth, on a global stage.
He won't say it, but I think Charles sees it as his particular mission to welcome Ireland into the Commonwealth.
The presence of the Taoiseach, President of Ireland and Sinn Fein First Minister-elect at the Coronation is a small step towards that goal, as will the coming State visit.
The possibility of the Royals successfully pulling off a charm offensive to Ireland that helps to build a more positive relationship between Britain and Ireland - which Commonwealth membership would be a strong symbolic signal - is one of the few things that the Royal family could actually achieve.
That would be a coup. But it’s difficult to see how why the Irish Republic would join the Commonwealth. Too much history in the way.
I would prefer it if we strengthened the British-Irish council.
The difference between the Commonwealth and the British-Irish council is that the latter is a matter for ministers, who don't seem to grasp the importance of the relationship with Ireland, while the Commonwealth is the one thing the Royal family have some influence over, and they seem willing to devote time and effort to the relationship with Ireland.
This Republican is willing to wish them the best of luck, in the knowledge that they'll need it.
Matthew Goodwin seems to be shocked that since Boris Johnson - a leader so ideologically bankrupt he decided which side to support on Brexit at the last minute - that the Tories don't actually have any ideas and so have no interest or ability to implement anything Goodwin thinks they should do.
This was all quite obvious since the day Johnson came in, that we would end up where we are now. But apparently not to distinguished "academic" Matthew Goodwin who thought the Tories actually had some genuine ideas and ways to achieve them.
He is an idiot.
As far as I can tell Goodwin is simply a commentator on politics. He doesn't have an agenda of his own.
Goodwin has been radicalised into an “alt-right” idiot by social media attention.
Possibly (who hasn't?), but there's also the possibility that he's simply seen where things are going, dislikes it, and wishes to stop it. My point is that from moving from analysis to advocacy he's betraying his profession and wasting his talents. We are oversupplied with commentators and undersupplied with good analysts.
I find their attitude to the monarchy a bit strange, because its the sort of thing they would be against in other circumstances so to speak.
What makes you say that? I've always thought the BBC were respectful bordering on sycophantic to the monarchy.
Yes, for example with Prince Andrew.
Just be grateful that Charles is the eldest.
God yes. Just imagine...
Over the last four generations it looks like the Spare is more crazy than the Heir in three cases out of four - Harry v William, Andrew v Charles, Margaret v Elizabeth - with the exception being KEVIII v KGVI. Hypothesis that this is due to upbringing and circumstance, rather than chance. So I guess watch out for Charlotte.
Charlotte will be like Anne. I worry about Louis.
I generally refrain from commenting on kids & parenting, but on wills & kates spares, I recon they’re making a mistake publishing photos / including them in official engagements.
W&K should design their lives so they’re entirely private citizens. Don’t feed the media/public appetite at all. Make it clear to the media & public that they’re going to be normal kids with normal lives. Use lawyers to enforce it.
Obviously, at home, treat them all 3 of them fairly, but make them understand they have different futures ahead of them. 2&3 have freedom & privacy that the heir wont ever have. Lots of options for careers, etc. It’s the best of the bad parenting options W&K have, imo.
The way they’re going, it does seem grimly inevitable that 2&3 will end up having a tragic life, at least as it is represented in the media. I genuinely hope the bastards don’t get to them.
It’s a very lonely job being monarch. You need the help and support of your family
There’s an emerging feeling that it was all a bit rubbish, a damp sermon that resonated with all too few. Today was better, doing the gardening, down the pub in the sunshine, having a barbecue. The Best of British Bank Holiday Sunday.
That’s just you. Basically whenever you moan at someone they agree to get you to shut up and stop ruining their fun
Considering the actions of the Met in arresting peaceful protestors 'in case' they did something else - how will police act in Swansea next Saturday (20th) when 20,000 march for Welsh independence.- will they be so stupid???
Considering the actions of the Met in arresting peaceful protestors 'in case' they did something else - how will police act in Swansea next Saturday (20th) when 20,000 march for Welsh independence.- will they be so stupid???
I expect it will be treated as irrelevant. There is no groundswell of support for an independent Wales.
Coronation of Charles III: nearly 9 million viewers watched the ceremony in France. 2 million more than for the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II euro.dayfr.com/local/amp/1702… #Coronation #KingCharlesIII #QueenCamilla
my take on yesterday 1) great day for UK plc (No other country gets that limelight !) 2) Everyone pretending they knew all about Zadoc The Priest when last week nobody would have had a clue 3) Penny Mordant will hold her seat with a better performance than the national picture suggests ! 4) The Church of England should make a bit of capital from this once in a generation opportunity. 5) The Princess of Wales is elite at being regal!
Considering the actions of the Met in arresting peaceful protestors 'in case' they did something else - how will police act in Swansea next Saturday (20th) when 20,000 march for Welsh independence.- will they be so stupid???
I expect it will be treated as irrelevant. There is no groundswell of support for an independent Wales.
You are entitled to your opinion but 20,000 people marching suggests otherwise - as do recent opinion polls which put support around 30-40%. Not yet a majority but getting there.......
Comments
The tories have knackered it and the young no longer care.
As old country boy, not surprised that country folk (let alone fellow celts) were stopping to see if a seriously soggy stranger might need a lift on a very rainy day.
You appear to be making your own luck - keep it up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGSKrC7dGcY
If you cannot appreciate the differences between the ROI and UK economies I'm unlikely to convince you. But what is seems you are now proposing to fulfil your 'cuts to taxes that would be aimed at radically increasing taxable activity' is actually a race to bottom on CT rates. It's not something that would end well.
As for the 'fact check' you dismiss I am left deciding whether to place my faith in LuckyGuy1983 or the IFS; I chose the IFS.
I do have Charles stamps though.
Eat yer hearts out, Pippa Pig and Boris!
I do think things have shifted.
Obviously the low rate of Corporation Tax is part of that, but it's only part of it - infrastructure investment, education, government commitment, are arguably much more important factors. I'm fairly confident that simply cutting corporation tax alone wouldn't suddenly bring a rush of foreign direct investment.
I've always thought that the pharmaceutical sector was one of the strongest industries in the UK, so I was gobsmacked to discover recently that Irish pharmaceutical exports were more than double those from the UK. That feels like a stark illustration of how the UK has just assumed that existing areas of strength will remain, and don't have to be nurtured.
Look also at the shambles over the years of wind turbine manufacture, or what is happening now to opportunities with small modular nuclear reactors, or battery factories.
That's not to say Ireland is perfect - they're continuing to make a right hames of opportunities for offshore wind, for example - but people need to pay more attention to what Ireland does than to just look at the tax rates and draw simplistic conclusions.
American Music Concert
Masters of Ceremonies - Frank Sinatra, Bob Hope
Performers - Vickie Carr, Mike Curb Congregation, Sammy Davis Jr, Bob Hope, Ray Stevens, Roger Williams, Les Brown Orchestra
Inaugural Youth Concert
Master of Ceremonies - Mike Curb
Performers - Solomon Burke, Mike Curb Congregation, The Mob, Jimmy Osmond, Tommy Roe, Laurie Lee Schafer, Ray Stevens, The Sylvers, Don Costa Orchestra
Funnily they never had a problem raising the debt ceiling when Trump was in office but all of a sudden are worried about the national debt !
Quite how anyone with a functioning brain in the USA continues to vote for these economic terrorists is beyond me .
https://www.google.com/amp/s/financialpost.com/news/economy/cibc-dodig-canada-risks-social-crisis-housing-immigration/wcm/43d33587-fc52-4a3f-a1f2-974f7ba0cb66/amp/
As for EVIII, the Great British Public thought that HE was the bees knees (unlike many in more privileged circles) back when he was Prince of Wales.
And (lest we forget) only few short years ago, Prince Harry was Hero of the Nation AND (in public anyway) the Firm.
The Cameron/Osborne Tories could have seemed in tune with that concert, just as they got away with not looking entirely out of place at the Olympic ceremony in 2012. But that was not an event that sits well with the Sunak/Anderson/Braverman Tories. And therein lies their problem.
My street had no party, there was no bunting, anywhere close to me.
The people on my street are a mix of security guards, labourers on construction sites in town, workers in supermarkets and a couple who work at the Kellogg's factory.
None of them tried to make a career anywhere, they were dealt what they were given.
The disconnect between how many on here experience life from what millions experience day to day is utterly remarkable and those on here seem utterly blind to that reality for the normal person in this country.
I went out today, if you'd been dropped here from space you'd have assumed it was just any other day of the year.
Yes I am sure London as usual is a bubble etc
Freedom of speech my arse.
What you are describing though is pretty similar to the parents at my son's school, it is not that far away from my day to day life. I suppose you always seek out the people with similar interests to you
And the rest is history.
(Ireland doesn’t invent drugs. They have a bunch of inverted US companies that claim to be Irish for tax reasons. And they have a great manufacturing set up).
The movie in particular is more parody than history.
As for Big Sis, I prophesy more than one generation of royals will be entangled in . . . Charlotte's Web . . .
This was all quite obvious since the day Johnson came in, that we would end up where we are now. But apparently not to distinguished "academic" Matthew Goodwin who thought the Tories actually had some genuine ideas and ways to achieve them.
He is an idiot.
There is a significant sink estate underclass that doesn't have a voice. Fortunately for the Tories they don't vote. Add to that renting and mortgaged struggling working families and the number becomes ever bigger. I have no idea of the figure but how does 50% plus sound?
W&K should design their lives so they’re entirely private citizens. Don’t feed the media/public appetite at all. Make it clear to the media & public that they’re going to be normal kids with normal lives. Use lawyers to enforce it.
Obviously, at home, treat them all 3 of them fairly, but make them understand they have different futures ahead of them. 2&3 have freedom & privacy that the heir wont ever have. Lots of options for careers, etc. It’s the best of the bad parenting options W&K have, imo.
The way they’re going, it does seem grimly inevitable that 2&3 will end up having a tragic life, at least as it is represented in the media. I genuinely hope the bastards don’t get to them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Éamon_de_Valera
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Éamon_de_Valera_Forest