The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Those problems will continue to exist whether there are data centres or not. I'd suggest fixing the problem.
I think the Green Party in government spent too much time/money on admirable improvements to public transport, and not enough on offshore wind and other energy infrastructure.
And yet public transport in Ireland (outwith the cities) is abysmal.
Public transport outside of cities is never going to be great, because the population densities are too low. But they are putting effort into introducing new services, both in cities and in rural areas.
There's a new bus service from Skibbereen to Killarney that seems to be popular, but I haven't tried it yet.
It’s like an exquisite form of Chinese water torture… drip drip drip
This really is the defining issue of the election. The UK's rapidly deteriorating health service directly and deeply affects large swathes of the electorate and is indicative of the general decline in services. It is a sign of a failed government.
Or a failed health service.
There is £251bn of government spending on health this year with a NHS workforce of over two million.
That's the thing. There's no shortage of resources for the NHS. The money must be spent appallingly inefficiently.
The NHS is a long way down the law of diminishing returns path.
I have sympathy for those public services which have received genuine funding cuts but have still maintained acceptable performance levels.
You never get an answer to the question: How much would be enough to fund the NHS?
It's like asking how fast to run on a treadmill to move forward.
It doesn't matter how much you spend it will never be enough.
Spend more, people stay alive longer, get more chronic illnesses, require more expenditure as a result. It's a never ending circle until people do die.
If the NHS could spend shedloads more money on prevention and general health advice (diet, cutting out UPF, eat more plants, exercise, mental wellbeing) in the long run the population would be far healthier, happier and cost the NHS a lot less. Big Food, wouldn't like it, though.
Alternatively getting more up to diet science and stop pushing the myth of five plus fruit and veg a day and other failed medical advice that has led to ever expanding chronic disease and a surge in diabetes.
My dad spent decades as a vegetarian and ended up with diabetes as a result. Subsequently now no longer a vegetarian and works hard to cut down carbs but still afflicted with diabetes.
I'm not taking any chances of ending up with diabetes myself. I've spent seven months now on zero a day for plant-based products. Down 45 pounds as a result, blood tests are great and resting heart rate down by over 10 beats per minute.
That's great for you. You should do whatever you feel is right, but it's scientific fact that there is no downside to including vegetables in your diet. It really isn't failed medical science.
No, its not. There is a growing body of evidence that there is a downside to including carbs and vegetables in your diet. Especially exclusively/primarily doing so and not incorporating enough meats and proteins and fats.
I think this is complicated because not all carbohydrates are the same, and the standard of research in this area is low.
Yes, it is extremely hard to make the case for any specific nutritional mix, especially as we all seem to process food differently. The best general health advice seems to be to eat as wide a variety of foods as possible, in moderation, and to keep sugar and salt to a minimum.
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Levels of tax will be the headline coming out of the labour manifesto launch because they've forgotten to go for any 'hook' policies, and journos are already picking out the increased tax figures. Which will mash into the made up figures. They don't need to do anything in particular but they'd be better doing something imo
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Those problems will continue to exist whether there are data centres or not. I'd suggest fixing the problem.
I think the Green Party in government spent too much time/money on admirable improvements to public transport, and not enough on offshore wind and other energy infrastructure.
And yet public transport in Ireland (outwith the cities) is abysmal.
Public transport outside of cities is never going to be great, because the population densities are too low. But they are putting effort into introducing new services, both in cities and in rural areas.
There's a new bus service from Skibbereen to Killarney that seems to be popular, but I haven't tried it yet.
Oh, Skibbereen! Oh, I used to go there as a little child. And I used to go on nature trails, and I used to spot flowers.
Labours biggest con trick of all - Labours “no new tax on working people” is just straightforward hypocrisy, easily called out as the lie it is when Labour confirmed today: that 6.5 million workers will be in Labour governments highest income tax bands, with new working families getting sucked into this stealth tax pain every year of Labour government.
Labour presented their manifesto knowing full well the number of people paying at the higher rate of 40 per cent and 'additional' rate of 45 per cent, is up from 5 million in recent years and more working people will be joining them in coming years under Labour government, including workers paying 20 per cent tax on incomes above just £12,570. All this will rake in a staggering £241billion from working households to go part the way to paying cost of Labours promises and policy’s, like the Nationalisation Programme of State Control.
Think about it, those earning just £12,570 a year under Labour will pay 20 per cent tax.
So why are they still called Labour and claiming Change, when they don’t represent Change from the highest tax burden since wartime, nor will protect hard working households like the Thatcher governments used to?
Labour and the Unions only represent the work shy, a bloating and costly state, and ruinous union demands for a 4 day working week.
And then, the icing on the huge tax cake, on top of all this theft of your money you worked hard for, Labours Net Zero taxes - a flag of Millibands gurning face, planted ON TOP the mountain of all this stealthy, over taxed pain, to remind you Labour has a ruinous idealogical side to their socialism. (Bridget Phillipson is straight out of Wallace and Gromit too, before politics she was a clay model at Hardman animations).
By all means fact check, but you will find every tax figure I said here is 110% true. This is what change to Labour actually means in the coming years.
Maths not your strong point, Moon?
No it’s not., you are right. I have posted as such lots of times. I bunked off Maths lessons.
However all maths used here is backed up by the OBR, and by that boffin bloke on Sky, and the IFS. It’s their math. You can’t argue with it. It’s exactly the same Tax rises on everyone that Sunak and Hunt already programmed in, and will also happen if Sunak and Hunt win the election unless someone switches them off.
Was it switched off today? No. That is the biggest take out from this launch. It should hurt Labour in the rest of this campaign, by risking TV to them.
In the coming years we will be taxed a record amount last seen fighting the Second World War. Unless the frozen threshold programme is switched off, I am talking factual math.
Interesting voxpop on R4 from their roaming the country series. Today they were in Redcar and it was surprising how many of the people they played interviews with had no idea how they were going to vote on the day.
There was one lady v pro Sunak, another wanting change, another wanting a protest vote so was going with reform but otherwise everyone else was “I really just don’t know” and many saying they didn’t know for the first time ever ahead of an election.
I wonder if this is the same across the whole country in real life and could it be that people who respond to polls largely feel obliged to give an answer (yes there are Don’t Knows) as they are en engaged in polling but largely there is still quite a lot to play for so over the next couple of weeks the Tories can go big on “Labour Tax Rises” and reduce the losses.
That is precisely the difference between a broadcaster's vox pops (people prepared to talk to a journo on camera) v. a statistically sound polling methodology.
It's not the polling that is going to be more at variance with the actual result.
It's almost as if the sort of person who wanders aimlessly around the town centre on a working day is not representative of the wider population.
What's fascinating is that pb'er regulars seem to get regularly polled, whereas I have never been polled.
I do live in a (historically) safe seat, and ignore unsolicited calls though. Which might have something to do with it.
It's a simple matter to register for online polls. I am on Yougovs, but only get a political poll every few months. I am being polled every week at the moment, this may well be because I am an Undecided yet certain to vote voter. They know my previous answers over the years so can judge trends well.
I'm similarly signed up to Yougov, but haven't been politically polled in the last month or two.
You could probably create a third party surge all by yourself.
I am a regular Facebook polee(?). Last week was the first time for ages that I was asked about voting intentions. As a down the line Lib Dem I wouldn't be part of any surge.
Labours biggest con trick of all - Labours “no new tax on working people” is just straightforward hypocrisy, easily called out as the lie it is when Labour confirmed today: that 6.5 million workers will be in Labour governments highest income tax bands, with new working families getting sucked into this stealth tax pain every year of Labour government.
Labour presented their manifesto knowing full well the number of people paying at the higher rate of 40 per cent and 'additional' rate of 45 per cent, is up from 5 million in recent years and more working people will be joining them in coming years under Labour government, including workers paying 20 per cent tax on incomes above just £12,570. All this will rake in a staggering £241billion from working households to go part the way to paying cost of Labours promises and policy’s, like the Nationalisation Programme of State Control.
Think about it, those earning just £12,570 a year under Labour will pay 20 per cent tax.
So why are they still called Labour and claiming Change, when they don’t represent Change from the highest tax burden since wartime, nor will protect hard working households like the Thatcher governments used to?
Labour and the Unions only represent the work shy, a bloating and costly state, and ruinous union demands for a 4 day working week.
And then, the icing on the huge tax cake, on top of all this theft of your money you worked hard for, Labours Net Zero taxes - a flag of Millibands gurning face, planted ON TOP the mountain of all this stealthy, over taxed pain, to remind you Labour has a ruinous idealogical side to their socialism. (Bridget Phillipson is straight out of Wallace and Gromit too, before politics she was a clay model at Hardman animations).
By all means fact check, but you will find every tax figure I said here is 110% true. This is what change to Labour actually means in the coming years.
Maths not your strong point, Moon?
No it’s not., you are right. I have posted as such lots of times. I bunked off Maths lessons.
However all maths used here is backed up by the OBR, and by that boffin bloke on Sky, and the IFS. It’s their math. You can’t argue with it. It’s exactly the same Tax rises on everyone that Sunak and Hunt already programmed in, and will also happen if Sunak and Hunt win the election unless someone switches them off.
Was it switched off today? No. That is the biggest take out from this launch. It should hurt Labour in the rest of this campaign, by risking TV to them.
In the coming years we will be taxed a record amount last seen fighting the Second World War. Unless the frozen threshold programme is switched off, I am talking factual math.
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Those problems will continue to exist whether there are data centres or not. I'd suggest fixing the problem.
I think the Green Party in government spent too much time/money on admirable improvements to public transport, and not enough on offshore wind and other energy infrastructure.
And yet public transport in Ireland (outwith the cities) is abysmal.
Public transport outside of cities is never going to be great, because the population densities are too low. But they are putting effort into introducing new services, both in cities and in rural areas.
There's a new bus service from Skibbereen to Killarney that seems to be popular, but I haven't tried it yet.
Oh, Skibbereen! Oh, I used to go there as a little child. And I used to go on nature trails, and I used to spot flowers.
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Those problems will continue to exist whether there are data centres or not. I'd suggest fixing the problem.
I think the Green Party in government spent too much time/money on admirable improvements to public transport, and not enough on offshore wind and other energy infrastructure.
And yet public transport in Ireland (outwith the cities) is abysmal.
Public transport outside of cities is never going to be great, because the population densities are too low. But they are putting effort into introducing new services, both in cities and in rural areas.
There's a new bus service from Skibbereen to Killarney that seems to be popular, but I haven't tried it yet.
Oh, Skibbereen! Oh, I used to go there as a little child. And I used to go on nature trails, and I used to spot flowers.
The people on here who don't get that reference are going to be "WTAF????"
Its interesting that despite all the business glad handing Labour have done, they still have to roll out Iceland boss every time as their "we are business friendly now".
Its interesting that despite all the business glad handing Labour have done, they still have to roll out Iceland boss every time as their "we are business friendly now".
Apparently you can always find at least one turkey that votes for Christmas.
Its interesting that despite all the business glad handing Labour have done, they still have to roll out Iceland boss every time as their "we are business friendly now".
Apparently you can always find at least one turkey that votes for Christmas.
The current government is the fuck business government.
Its interesting that despite all the business glad handing Labour have done, they still have to roll out Iceland boss every time as their "we are business friendly now".
Apparently you can always find at least one turkey that votes for Christmas.
The current government is the fuck business government.
And yet the only person Labour seem to be able to roll out if the Iceland bloke who has an axe to grind because he didn't get a plum Tory seat.
I think its an interesting observation in comparison to Blair, where he a whole range of people willing to back him.
In 136 pages of manifesto Keir Starmer is included in at least 35 photos.
The title is change and the inside cover is the word change 200 times.
Subtle.
The Labour Party sought my advice on their manifesto.
I guess Bowie's Changes will be the victory song?
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange) Ch-ch-changes, don't want to be a richer man* Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange) Ch-ch-changes, just gonna have to be a different man** Time may change me But I can't trace time
*just as well, what with the £2k tax bombshell **not Sunak
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Those problems will continue to exist whether there are data centres or not. I'd suggest fixing the problem.
I think the Green Party in government spent too much time/money on admirable improvements to public transport, and not enough on offshore wind and other energy infrastructure.
You could move all the data centres out of Ireland and to somewhere cool and Scandi with massive access to renewables. Why not close the lot and help the planet ?
Because Ireland’s low corporation tax attracts a lot of multinational tech companies to base European headquarters in Ireland.
'The bond that reaches through the generations' its such vacuous shit. Its utterly meaningless guff when it's not backed up by anything but vague slogans and promises of some future nirvana. They don't deserve to win any more than the Tories do to survive. Grim.
Levels of tax will be the headline coming out of the labour manifesto launch because they've forgotten to go for any 'hook' policies, and journos are already picking out the increased tax figures. Which will mash into the made up figures. They don't need to do anything in particular but they'd be better doing something imo
Worse. Story might be increased taxes but still lots of cuts.
That’s true for all parties, but it might keep their share depressed. Not that that matters if the Tories can’t find a magic lamp and steal half the reform vote.
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Those problems will continue to exist whether there are data centres or not. I'd suggest fixing the problem.
I think the Green Party in government spent too much time/money on admirable improvements to public transport, and not enough on offshore wind and other energy infrastructure.
And yet public transport in Ireland (outwith the cities) is abysmal.
Public transport outside of cities is never going to be great, because the population densities are too low. But they are putting effort into introducing new services, both in cities and in rural areas.
There's a new bus service from Skibbereen to Killarney that seems to be popular, but I haven't tried it yet.
Oh, Skibbereen! Oh, I used to go there as a little child. And I used to go on nature trails, and I used to spot flowers.
Sunak looked defeated last night no doubt from the fallout over his DDay antics and, apparently, immediately following the event he got on a plane arriving in Italy at 1.00am for the G7 meeting which I expect he will be the last to leave
I may be wrong but I detect that he may be receiving some sympathy, and in any respect the mental strain on him and his family must be colossal and for as poor as he is, he just cannot leave behind the Johnson and Truss disasters and the only consolation is that it will be over in three weeks
Mind you Starmer was also poor last night, with the audience openly laughing at his 'father was a toolmaker', he was called a robot, and the audience member who heckled Sunak later said that neither Sunak or Starmer have the answers for the NHS
However, he is going to be PM 3 weeks tomorrow and then the real test begins for him, labour, the country and of course the future role of the conservative party in our politics
He would probably be best dropping the “my father was a toolmaker” schtick now as it’s becoming an internet joke with memes about it. He doesn’t need to do it as they are going to win so why bother giving people ammo to mock you.
And sure 'twas no wonder His mother and father were toolmakers too
It's an inherently quaint and old fashioned thing to be - presumably tools are made by robots these days.
Sunak looked defeated last night no doubt from the fallout over his DDay antics and, apparently, immediately following the event he got on a plane arriving in Italy at 1.00am for the G7 meeting which I expect he will be the last to leave
I may be wrong but I detect that he may be receiving some sympathy, and in any respect the mental strain on him and his family must be colossal and for as poor as he is, he just cannot leave behind the Johnson and Truss disasters and the only consolation is that it will be over in three weeks
Mind you Starmer was also poor last night, with the audience openly laughing at his 'father was a toolmaker', he was called a robot, and the audience member who heckled Sunak later said that neither Sunak or Starmer have the answers for the NHS
However, he is going to be PM 3 weeks tomorrow and then the real test begins for him, labour, the country and of course the future role of the conservative party in our politics
He would probably be best dropping the “my father was a toolmaker” schtick now as it’s becoming an internet joke with memes about it. He doesn’t need to do it as they are going to win so why bother giving people ammo to mock you.
And sure 'twas no wonder His mother and father were toolmakers too
It's an inherently quaint and old fashioned thing to be - presumably tools are made by robots these days.
Many years ago there was a TV programme called 'What's My Line'. The panel had to guess the 'quaint and old fashioned' jobs of guests. I suspect most would now be redundant. As an example my father was trained as a painter and decorator but during WW2 he was employed as a fitter making gears for tank and airplane engines. Do we still have fitters?
Labours biggest con trick of all - Labours “no new tax on working people” is just straightforward hypocrisy, easily called out as the lie it is when Labour confirmed today: that 6.5 million workers will be in Labour governments highest income tax bands, with new working families getting sucked into this stealth tax pain every year of Labour government.
Labour presented their manifesto knowing full well the number of people paying at the higher rate of 40 per cent and 'additional' rate of 45 per cent, is up from 5 million in recent years and more working people will be joining them in coming years under Labour government, including workers paying 20 per cent tax on incomes above just £12,570. All this will rake in a staggering £241billion from working households to go part the way to paying cost of Labours promises and policy’s, like the Nationalisation Programme of State Control.
Think about it, those earning just £12,570 a year under Labour will pay 20 per cent tax.
So why are they still called Labour and claiming Change, when they don’t represent Change from the highest tax burden since wartime, nor will protect hard working households like the Thatcher governments used to?
Labour and the Unions only represent the work shy, a bloating and costly state, and ruinous union demands for a 4 day working week.
And then, the icing on the huge tax cake, on top of all this theft of your money you worked hard for, Labours Net Zero taxes - a flag of Millibands gurning face, planted ON TOP the mountain of all this stealthy, over taxed pain, to remind you Labour has a ruinous idealogical side to their socialism. (Bridget Phillipson is straight out of Wallace and Gromit too, before politics she was a clay model at Hardman animations).
By all means fact check, but you will find every tax figure I said here is 110% true. This is what change to Labour actually means in the coming years.
Maths not your strong point, Moon?
No it’s not., you are right. I have posted as such lots of times. I bunked off Maths lessons.
However all maths used here is backed up by the OBR, and by that boffin bloke on Sky, and the IFS. It’s their math. You can’t argue with it. It’s exactly the same Tax rises on everyone that Sunak and Hunt already programmed in, and will also happen if Sunak and Hunt win the election unless someone switches them off.
Was it switched off today? No. That is the biggest take out from this launch. It should hurt Labour in the rest of this campaign, by risking TV to them.
In the coming years we will be taxed a record amount last seen fighting the Second World War. Unless the frozen threshold programme is switched off, I am talking factual math.
Its interesting that despite all the business glad handing Labour have done, they still have to roll out Iceland boss every time as their "we are business friendly now".
The Iceland boss is going to love the junk food crackdown. The only thing they will have left to sell is Kerry Katona’s prawn ring.
Its interesting that despite all the business glad handing Labour have done, they still have to roll out Iceland boss every time as their "we are business friendly now".
The Iceland boss is going to love the junk food crackdown. The only thing they will have left to sell is Kerry Katona’s prawn ring.
I believe she already sells that through independent channels....
In 136 pages of manifesto Keir Starmer is included in at least 35 photos.
The title is change and the inside cover is the word change 200 times.
Subtle.
The Labour Party sought my advice on their manifesto.
I guess Bowie's Changes will be the victory song?
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange) Ch-ch-changes, don't want to be a richer man* Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange) Ch-ch-changes, just gonna have to be a different man** Time may change me But I can't trace time
*just as well, what with the £2k tax bombshell **not Sunak
I think The Who's "Don't Get Fooled Again" would be more appropriate.
"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution Take a bow for the new revolution Smile and grin at the change all around me Pick up my guitar and play Just like yesterday And I'll get on my knees and pray We don't get fooled again Don't get fooled again No, no Yeah Meet the new boss Same as the old boss"
Sunak looked defeated last night no doubt from the fallout over his DDay antics and, apparently, immediately following the event he got on a plane arriving in Italy at 1.00am for the G7 meeting which I expect he will be the last to leave
I may be wrong but I detect that he may be receiving some sympathy, and in any respect the mental strain on him and his family must be colossal and for as poor as he is, he just cannot leave behind the Johnson and Truss disasters and the only consolation is that it will be over in three weeks
Mind you Starmer was also poor last night, with the audience openly laughing at his 'father was a toolmaker', he was called a robot, and the audience member who heckled Sunak later said that neither Sunak or Starmer have the answers for the NHS
However, he is going to be PM 3 weeks tomorrow and then the real test begins for him, labour, the country and of course the future role of the conservative party in our politics
He would probably be best dropping the “my father was a toolmaker” schtick now as it’s becoming an internet joke with memes about it. He doesn’t need to do it as they are going to win so why bother giving people ammo to mock you.
And sure 'twas no wonder His mother and father were toolmakers too
It's an inherently quaint and old fashioned thing to be - presumably tools are made by robots these days.
If you're only making one tool, for one job, it can still be easier to get a toolmaker to make it.
The leader of the French Republicans is leading his party from the balcony of a barricaded room. The French are actively covering for our whole Trussterfuck
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
I wouldn't get too excited though.
I strongly suspect that's what SKS most cares about and will be near the top of his priority list.
In 136 pages of manifesto Keir Starmer is included in at least 35 photos.
The title is change and the inside cover is the word change 200 times.
Subtle.
The Labour Party sought my advice on their manifesto.
I guess Bowie's Changes will be the victory song?
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange) Ch-ch-changes, don't want to be a richer man* Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange) Ch-ch-changes, just gonna have to be a different man** Time may change me But I can't trace time
*just as well, what with the £2k tax bombshell **not Sunak
I think The Who's "Don't Get Fooled Again" would be more appropriate.
"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution Take a bow for the new revolution Smile and grin at the change all around me Pick up my guitar and play Just like yesterday And I'll get on my knees and pray We don't get fooled again"
'The bond that reaches through the generations' its such vacuous shit. Its utterly meaningless guff when it's not backed up by anything but vague slogans and promises of some future nirvana. They don't deserve to win any more than the Tories do to survive. Grim.
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
I wouldn't get too excited though.
I strongly suspect that's what SKS most cares about and will be near the top of his priority list.
No, I think he’s a pragmatist. He knows there’s no way back in that won’t consume his whole leadership. No desire form the EU and no mechanism to do anything other than bilateral bits and pieces. I think the EU has genuinely left our politics for a bit - I would have said institutions might get built around the new community we are in, but I doubt it under Le Penn.
'The bond that reaches through the generations' its such vacuous shit. Its utterly meaningless guff when it's not backed up by anything but vague slogans and promises of some future nirvana. They don't deserve to win any more than the Tories do to survive. Grim.
Are they talking about James Bond?
No he means our gilts. Those bonds definitely cross the generations….
The key takehome from the D-Day debacle is that the vast majority of the electorate like to see britain along side neighbours and allies affirming its international commitment..... a britain at the heart of the western international community honouring that heritage.... basically the opposite of free wheeling go it alone brexiteerism. I saw Marr's piece in the New Statesman talking about rejoining the single market
"But the country has already changed its mind about his rotten Brexit deal, and there would be no opportunity like Labour’s first 18 months to improve relations with the giant market on our doorstep. As the EU grapples with the problem of enlargement to its east and populism at home, the notion of a more flexible, less monolithic EU of concentric or interlocking circles is growing in potency."
What I am looking for in Labour's manifesto is silence on the EU - that will (ironically) be a huge indicator to me where things are going. It will be a carte blance on EU trading relations and security agreements.
Sunak's actions on leaving the D-Day celebrations were very much a tacit expression of inward looking, isolationist ethos of the populist right, and its time has come.... I seriously think the country is turning a corner on brexit going into the next parliament.
Lol, this is an absolutely brilliant example of the genre: "What D-Day was really about is rejoining the single market".
You've got to admire the creativity, the imagination, the insightful juxtaposition of two apparently unrelated topics ;-)
We Remainers are never going to go away.
Not until you die off anyway.
There is nothing to "Remain" part of. You lost that war. We left the EU.
There is only Rejoin. And that is the dog that hasn't barked in this election. And if not this, then when?
You're right about it not becoming a major issue in this election, but I think it provides a general sense of unease to politics in the UK.
By a ratio of at least 3:1, people think the negatives of Brexit outweigh the benefits. For Leavers, immigration is at an all time high - so it was pointless for many. There must be some regret or misgiving there. For Remainers, there is no hint that any party will bring us back in or materially improve our relationship with Europe, so it sits as an open wound.
It's not being spoken about, but I think it contributes to the doom and gloom.
I think that is just a cipher for 'things were better before 2016' - which is understandable; the world was a surer place, no Ukraine, no pandemic, no culture wars (at least, not on the scale we see now), less immigration. Understandable people might wish things were otherwise. I'd happily swallow rejoin if it could mean we could wipe out all that other unpleasantness. But clearly, almost everything bad which has happened since 2016 is nothing to do with Brexit, and undoing Brexit wouldn't bring back those apples. That's just the way humans think. Change the thing we did and we can control and undo all those things we can't control.
If we were still in the EU, today’s news headline would be that electric cars are about to get more expensive, the EU voting for protectionism over Net Zero.
Great for the campaigners who think cars are evil and we should all get the bus, for for the average motorist who just to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, not so much.
Transportation was always a weakness in our climate change mitigation efforts - look at the massive fuss over the 2030 deadline for new ICE cars, even while other sectors of the economy made massive reductions in emissions. The Chinese have exploited the gap left by the lethargy and lobbying of European/American car makers.
It's darkly funny. When I was at Uni, there was all sorts of depressed talk about the industrialisation of China and India making climate change efforts basically pointless. Instead, the Chinese have flooded the market with cheap solar panels and cheap EVs to the extent that it's going to destroy fossil fuel industries in the West.
Annual CO2 emissions are still rising. It is delusional to think that by 2050 this will be much different. Even if output is halved from present levels (the evidence that this can be done is absent), levels will only be rising but a little more slowly.
The rhetoric is all reminiscent of UK General Election rhetoric. A realistic truthful conversation would make a nice change.
Climate change mitigation is not binary. It's not like there is a big climate change switch when we hit 2 degrees.
Most people working in this field know and accept that a huge amount of climate change damage is baked in. That's why we need to start discussing adaptation - flood defences, new pandemics, famine, mass migration.
But that doesn't mean the world should stop trying to prevent it being even worse - there is no sign of China abandoning solar or EVs, is there? The question for the UK is whether we want to embrace all this new technology or get left behind by the rest of the world.
Agree. This discussion is obscured by Trumpian denialists and 'Just Stop Oil' fundamentalists. The 'amelioration' aspect is often ignored.
Even if you don't agree with their methods, there's nothing particularly fundamentalist about JSO's demands. There is general scientific agreement that we need to rapidly reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and ceasing to issue new licences for oil exploration and production is broadly compatible with that aim. Amelioration to cope with the damage already in the pipeline is of course also required, but that's in addition to, not instead of, a sharp reduction in oil consumption.
Perhaps you'd like to accompany me if I have to close a factory in Aberdeen in the second half of this year. Decent people will be put out of a job because of flawed government policies, and I don't see too many "green jobs" they can take round where they live.
If I hear another idiot saying that they want "Green growth"... It apparently means growth without making anything, building anything. And it is free.
Changing technologies is massively disruptive for an industry - see Germany and American car makers. Who are stumbling.
The idea that this is free or painless is yet another populist, stupid delusion.
It is hard and expensive. And worth doing. Just decoupling our economy from the times that El Supremo has the hiccups and starts another war, and energy prices zoom up, it worth it. X recessions avoided.
Saving the planet is a nice side effect.
Further, in the longer term, as energy prices fall below fossil fuel energy prices, we have interesting opportunities.
Indeed. Switching to a sustainable economy is both necessary and also a huge challenge. Those who paint it as something that can be done without too much bother or inconvenience risk scuppering the whole effort. It's like fighting a war. It's necessary, but it inevitably involves some sacrifice. Smart leadership would prepare people for the challenges ahead as well as ensuring that the burdens are shared fairly.
The other thing is that the status quo is not an option. The energy transition away from fossil fuels is going to happen, and you don't want to be a laggard.
Estimates suggest 20% of all the electricity generated in Ireland will go to keeping Data Centres functioning.
Why not close them ?
Because they are useful and you can generate the electricity for them cleanly.
Only way in the future, Ireland currently generates 52% of its energy from oil or coal. With a growing population and a noted lack of infrastructure investment, that will be the case for some time. Data centres will consume energy and there is no green backstop to feed them.
Those problems will continue to exist whether there are data centres or not. I'd suggest fixing the problem.
I think the Green Party in government spent too much time/money on admirable improvements to public transport, and not enough on offshore wind and other energy infrastructure.
And yet public transport in Ireland (outwith the cities) is abysmal.
Public transport outside of cities is never going to be great, because the population densities are too low. But they are putting effort into introducing new services, both in cities and in rural areas.
There's a new bus service from Skibbereen to Killarney that seems to be popular, but I haven't tried it yet.
Oh, Skibbereen! Oh, I used to go there as a little child. And I used to go on nature trails, and I used to spot flowers.
Well run clubs will end up subsidising shitty owners.
The EPL is a massive success story, its the world leader in football entertainment. From China to Canada it is the league everybody watches. It doesn't need messing with.
Levels of tax will be the headline coming out of the labour manifesto launch because they've forgotten to go for any 'hook' policies, and journos are already picking out the increased tax figures. Which will mash into the made up figures. They don't need to do anything in particular but they'd be better doing something imo
Worse. Story might be increased taxes but still lots of cuts.
That’s true for all parties, but it might keep their share depressed. Not that that matters if the Tories can’t find a magic lamp and steal half the reform vote.
But if anyone wants to say “Labour are bound to raise direct taxes” prepare for me laughing loudly right in your face. They are inheriting Sunak’s plan for record tax take, they won’t need any more. Stealthy taxes will be pouring in.
No satire could ever be as funny as the deposed leader of a political party locking themselves in their HQ and conducting a press conference from a window so he doesn’t have to open the door which might let his former colleagues in. It’s mental.
Another massive British company about to fall into foreign ownership? A french tycoon already has a chunk as do, I think, German state telecoms company.
Royal Mail seems destined to be non-UK within months.
We are out of our minds.
That is one of Thatcher's enduring legacies. (Either the policy of laissez faire, or our being out of our minds; you decide.)
Labours biggest con trick of all - Labours “no new tax on working people” is just straightforward hypocrisy, easily called out as the lie it is when Labour confirmed today: that 6.5 million workers will be in Labour governments highest income tax bands, with new working families getting sucked into this stealth tax pain every year of Labour government.
Labour presented their manifesto knowing full well the number of people paying at the higher rate of 40 per cent and 'additional' rate of 45 per cent, is up from 5 million in recent years and more working people will be joining them in coming years under Labour government, including workers paying 20 per cent tax on incomes above just £12,570. All this will rake in a staggering £241billion from working households to go part the way to paying cost of Labours promises and policy’s, like the Nationalisation Programme of State Control.
Think about it, those earning just £12,570 a year under Labour will pay 20 per cent tax.
So why are they still called Labour and claiming Change, when they don’t represent Change from the highest tax burden since wartime, nor will protect hard working households like the Thatcher governments used to?
Labour and the Unions only represent the work shy, a bloating and costly state, and ruinous union demands for a 4 day working week.
And then, the icing on the huge tax cake, on top of all this theft of your money you worked hard for, Labours Net Zero taxes - a flag of Millibands gurning face, planted ON TOP the mountain of all this stealthy, over taxed pain, to remind you Labour has a ruinous idealogical side to their socialism. (Bridget Phillipson is straight out of Wallace and Gromit too, before politics she was a clay model at Hardman animations).
By all means fact check, but you will find every tax figure I said here is 110% true. This is what change to Labour actually means in the coming years.
Maths not your strong point, Moon?
No it’s not., you are right. I have posted as such lots of times. I bunked off Maths lessons.
However all maths used here is backed up by the OBR, and by that boffin bloke on Sky, and the IFS. It’s their math. You can’t argue with it. It’s exactly the same Tax rises on everyone that Sunak and Hunt already programmed in, and will also happen if Sunak and Hunt win the election unless someone switches them off.
Was it switched off today? No. That is the biggest take out from this launch. It should hurt Labour in the rest of this campaign, by risking TV to them.
In the coming years we will be taxed a record amount last seen fighting the Second World War. Unless the frozen threshold programme is switched off, I am talking factual math.
Factual math!
Never change Loon Rabbit.
This is a very strong mini thread discussion we are having today on PB. This is the actual nub of this election campaign imo - right here, right now. So will you stop interrupting with your silliness. 😠
Straight forward fact. To go in government not splashing money around this end of the parliament, to run into economic trouble later in the term, might be 10/10 sensible way to govern in the next couple of years, but it makes for uninspiring, thin gruel in a manifesto in an election.
Labour supporters can’t have it both ways. I’m not letting anyone have it both ways, all voters need to chose - fiscally prudent government in coming years, or flashy and cheering giveaway manifesto leading to all sorts of problems, you can’t have both. Pure logic. And factual math. 1974 to 1979 refers.
In fact the way Starmer has beaten the left and trumped the Unions in order to have this very fiscally dry plan for the next few years is very impressive. It is exactly what is needed for good government the next few years. It’s good strong party leadership. Greens and Lib Dem’s and reform should vote for it, lend tactical votes to it, rather than criticise from out in their fantasy lands and fantasy manifesto’s, as they will do in coming days.
Nor can Tories attack this at all, because it’s THEIR tax rise programme, this same highest tax take since world war 2 record on its way IS Sunak’s plan, it’s just not being turned off by Labour.
And in yesterday’s interview Sunak looked ridiculous, complete Charlatan denying he knew anything about his plan has taxes rising like this, stealthily. To a record.
'Change' is not 'nothing at all'. Except when it is. Visionless offer from Labour. No wonder everyone is bored
Higher Utility charges to pay for the Socialist Starmer’s Nationalisation Programme. State Ownership means being an employer, and with that comes costs, wages, training, a pension scheme etc etc etc And who’s paying for all this? You the taxpayer. Not only that, Labour’s anti aspirational VAT on private schooling, not touching the wealthy famous schools, but destroying all the fine local ones, working families have been using for their families for generations. And the dreaded garden tax is coming - they have it in Labour Wales, where tax man flies drones over your property to hit you with Labours brand new stealth tax.
You won’t get any of this with a Tory government. Fact. 💁♀️
Why bother with drones when you just look up (a) the property registry, (b) Google Maps terrain option, and (c) OS commercial map access?
Is it at least better than when the papers wanted us to be shocked that Ed M had been in relationships with intelligent, accomplished, attractive women? What a loser, right!
Skimmed the manifesto. A lot of well meaning stuff but not a tremendous amount of concrete proposals. I have to say I’m rather disappointed, I hoped that there might be a bit more meat put on the bones when Labour got to this point. There are the odd hints of more substantive institutional reform but it’s not quite as pronounced as I’d really have liked it to have been.
We are giving Starmer a real carte blanche here, and I am comfortable to give him it this time, but I do think that this approach is potentially going to store up problems for Labour in government.
Comments
There's a new bus service from Skibbereen to Killarney that seems to be popular, but I haven't tried it yet.
The title is change and the inside cover is the word change 200 times.
Subtle.
Which will mash into the made up figures.
They don't need to do anything in particular but they'd be better doing something imo
However all maths used here is backed up by the OBR, and by that boffin bloke on Sky, and the IFS. It’s their math. You can’t argue with it. It’s exactly the same Tax rises on everyone that Sunak and Hunt already programmed in, and will also happen if Sunak and Hunt win the election unless someone switches them off.
Was it switched off today? No. That is the biggest take out from this launch. It should hurt Labour in the rest of this campaign, by risking TV to them.
In the coming years we will be taxed a record amount last seen fighting the Second World War. Unless the frozen threshold programme is switched off, I am talking factual math.
Bring on the high-energy wallpaper and abstract paintings.
Never change Loon Rabbit.
https://x.com/clpressfr/status/1801181213589111166
https://partridge.cloud/scene/?id=74t4Yw02RNMH
Inquiring minds want to know.
🔴
@UKLabour
commits to introducing the Independent Football Regulator in their manifesto:
⚫ Give fans a greater say in the way their clubs are run
⚫ Ensure financial sustainability of football clubs
⚫ No to closed shop leagues
https://x.com/FairGameUK/status/1801207402470965324
I think its an interesting observation in comparison to Blair, where he a whole range of people willing to back him.
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange)
Ch-ch-changes, don't want to be a richer man*
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes (Turn and face the strange)
Ch-ch-changes, just gonna have to be a different man**
Time may change me
But I can't trace time
*just as well, what with the £2k tax bombshell
**not Sunak
https://x.com/rnaudbertrand/status/1801114239572328663
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/01/372_COVER-image.jpg
They don't deserve to win any more than the Tories do to survive. Grim.
That’s true for all parties, but it might keep their share depressed. Not that that matters if the Tories can’t find a magic lamp and steal half the reform vote.
Farage is the most popular politician in Britain, is he not?
That's almost a Cones Hotline level of policy. This isn't going to go well, is it?
"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
And I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no
Yeah
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss"
https://x.com/cerfiafr/status/1801181744193769562?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
I strongly suspect that's what SKS most cares about and will be near the top of his priority list.
Same as the old boss
Exciting, but not for a friend of a friend.
The problems are lower down.
He's probably a nightmare to work for and with, doesn't give a toss about man management and has zero organisational skills.
Have a read about the methodology of that.
https://yougov.co.uk/about/ratings-faq
Bastani has become quite an interesting and neutral observer of politics now he’s moved on from childish corbynism
Thanks in advance.
As for Farage, why did Gove and Cummings realise that a Farage fronted Leave campaign would see Remain win 70/30.
Is it because it he is so popular?
(Either the policy of laissez faire, or our being out of our minds; you decide.)
No one cares. We voted for BoJo, remember.
Another damp squib from guido
Straight forward fact. To go in government not splashing money around this end of the parliament, to run into economic trouble later in the term, might be 10/10 sensible way to govern in the next couple of years, but it makes for uninspiring, thin gruel in a manifesto in an election.
Labour supporters can’t have it both ways. I’m not letting anyone have it both ways, all voters need to chose - fiscally prudent government in coming years, or flashy and cheering giveaway manifesto leading to all sorts of problems, you can’t have both. Pure logic. And factual math. 1974 to 1979 refers.
In fact the way Starmer has beaten the left and trumped the Unions in order to have this very fiscally dry plan for the next few years is very impressive. It is exactly what is needed for good government the next few years. It’s good strong party leadership. Greens and Lib Dem’s and reform should vote for it, lend tactical votes to it, rather than criticise from out in their fantasy lands and fantasy manifesto’s, as they will do in coming days.
Nor can Tories attack this at all, because it’s THEIR tax rise programme, this same highest tax take since world war 2 record on its way IS Sunak’s plan, it’s just not being turned off by Labour.
And in yesterday’s interview Sunak looked ridiculous, complete Charlatan denying he knew anything about his plan has taxes rising like this, stealthily. To a record.
Er ...
We've got to the stage where almost anyone would do better than Rishi.
For that, the right of the Tory party will be immensely grateful to the centrist wets supporting poor Blairite tribute act Sunak...
We are giving Starmer a real carte blanche here, and I am comfortable to give him it this time, but I do think that this approach is potentially going to store up problems for Labour in government.