For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Only if you think a big centre-left versus a big centre-right party is somehow an inevitability. Canada doesn’t have that. Japan doesn’t have that. France doesn’t currently have that. We could become like France, with Davey as Macron, or like Canada, with Davey as Trudeau.
It is, in Canada the Liberal Party is now effectively the main centre left party (occasionally alternating in that role with the social democratic NDP who overtook them as the main non Conservative party in 2011 before Trudeau replaced them again in 2015 and returned the Liberals to power). In the US the Democrats are effectively a liberal centre left party too.
In Japan by contrast their LDs are the main party of the centre right with the opposition Constitutional Democratic party the main party of the centre left. In France Macron's party is now the main centre right party effectively and was second behind Melenchon's socialist left block in the recent legislative elections and beat Le Pen in the run off of the 2022 presidential election, in both elections Macron and his party getting most of the preferences of Les Republicains voters (LR formerly the main French centre right party).
In Australia of course the Liberals are the main centre right party too in alliance with the conservative Nationals against the centre left Australian Labor party currently in government.
So to get into the big 2 the Liberals would either have to go centre left like Trudeau or centre right like Macron or say the Australian Liberals when they were led by Malcolm Turnbull
What I really think about this "I will move unless my taxes go down" thing. I welcome everyone who is born here or has moved here when they make a commitment to the country. The others are just transactional. As with any "customer" we should aim to keep them happy as long as they keep paying.
We get it every time a Labour government gets elected, and few actually go. The reasons:
1) their income and wealth is derived from here, and they lose touch when they leave.
2) these "high worth" individuals have enough income to enjoy a lifestyle (generally in London) that exceeds the lifestyle in other parts of the world.
3) the novelty of living in a Sardinian villa surrounded by Mafia wears off fairly quickly
4) and most importantly, taxes have not gone up yet, and may well not do so, and are by and large avoidable by employing financial engineering. Starmer is quite obviously not Corbyn,
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Only if you think a big centre-left versus a big centre-right party is somehow an inevitability. Canada doesn’t have that. Japan doesn’t have that. France doesn’t currently have that. We could become like France, with Davey as Macron, or like Canada, with Davey as Trudeau.
Canada does have that. Every PM in Canadian history has been Liberal (left) or Conservative (right) in one iteration or another. The parties have died and evolved, but there's consistently been that left versus right divide.
Trudeau is Starmer not Davey.
Trudeau is possibly to the left of Davey, but he’s to the right of Starmer, I would’ve said.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Fairliered jnr. who works offshore, has recently moved job from oil and gas support to renewables support. He is an engineer, though, so easier than if he was a geologist.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
That was for the plebs. It's the high-value folk that can citizen anywhere
This is something that will need to be looked at. Some highly-paid employees can simply transfer to one of their firm's overseas branches. That's fine, and is aiui what @MaxPB is contemplating.
On the other hand, what will need to be sorted out before it reaches critical mass is people extending WFH to mean work from whatever beach they fancy with no regard to local law or taxes, or their employer's liabilities and obligations.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Only if you think a big centre-left versus a big centre-right party is somehow an inevitability. Canada doesn’t have that. Japan doesn’t have that. France doesn’t currently have that. We could become like France, with Davey as Macron, or like Canada, with Davey as Trudeau.
It is, in Canada the Liberal Party is now effectively the main centre left party (occasionally alternating in that role with the social democratic NDP who overtook them as the main non Conservative party in 2011 before Trudeau replaced them again in 2015 and returned the Liberals to power). In the US the Democrats are effectively a liberal centre left party too.
In Japan by contrasts their LDs are the main party of the centre right with the opposition Constitutional Democratic party the main party of the centre left. In France Macron's party is now the main centre right party effectively and was second behind Melenchon's socialist left block in the recent legislative elections and beat Le Pen in the run off of the 2022 presidential election, in both elections Macron and his party getting most of the preferences of Les Republicains voters (LR formerly the main French centre right party).
In Australia of course the Liberals are the main centre right party too in alliance with the conservative Nationals against the centre left Australian Labor party currently in government.
So to get into the big 2 the Liberals would either have to go centre left like Trudeau or centre right like Macron or say the Australian Liberals when they were led by Malcolm Turnbull
If you define the most left-wing big party as being centre-left and similarly on the right, then, yes, you can squeeze the data to fit your hypothesis.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
That was for the plebs. It's the high-value folk that can citizen anywhere
“If you believe you are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere,” as the best of the last 4 Tory PMs said.
PB.com has a very high percentage of citizens of nowhere. An observation, not a judgment.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Only if you think a big centre-left versus a big centre-right party is somehow an inevitability. Canada doesn’t have that. Japan doesn’t have that. France doesn’t currently have that. We could become like France, with Davey as Macron, or like Canada, with Davey as Trudeau.
Canada does have that. Every PM in Canadian history has been Liberal (left) or Conservative (right) in one iteration or another. The parties have died and evolved, but there's consistently been that left versus right divide.
Trudeau is Starmer not Davey.
Trudeau is possibly to the left of Davey, but he’s to the right of Starmer, I would’ve said.
The left-right positions move over time, Starmer is to the left of Blair but to the right of Attlee.
However the Liberals are Canada's centre-left party and fairly consistently have been. Canada has always been led by either a Liberal (left) or a Conservative (right), that's their divide.
Nature abhors a vacuum and left/right positions evolve relative to the nation, but there is rather consistently that left/right divide.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Only if you think a big centre-left versus a big centre-right party is somehow an inevitability. Canada doesn’t have that. Japan doesn’t have that. France doesn’t currently have that. We could become like France, with Davey as Macron, or like Canada, with Davey as Trudeau.
Canada does have that. Every PM in Canadian history has been Liberal (left) or Conservative (right) in one iteration or another. The parties have died and evolved, but there's consistently been that left versus right divide.
Trudeau is Starmer not Davey.
Trudeau is possibly to the left of Davey, but he’s to the right of Starmer, I would’ve said.
The left-right positions move over time, Starmer is to the left of Blair but to the right of Attlee.
However the Liberals are Canada's centre-left party and fairly consistently have been. Canada has always been led by either a Liberal (left) or a Conservative (right), that's their divide.
Nature abhors a vacuum and left/right positions evolve relative to the nation, but there is rather consistently that left/right divide.
What you’re saying is that if there are two big parties, we should label one left and one right.
What I really think about this "I will move unless my taxes go down" thing. I welcome everyone who is born here or has moved here when they make a commitment to the country. The others are just transactional. As with any "customer" we should aim to keep them happy as long as they keep paying.
We get it every time a Labour government gets elected, and few actually go. The reasons:
1) their income and wealth is derived from here, and they lose touch when they leave.
2) these "high worth" individuals have enough income to enjoy a lifestyle (generally in London) that exceeds the lifestyle in other parts of the world.
3) the novelty of living in a Sardinian villa surrounded by Mafia wears off fairly quickly
4) and most importantly, taxes have not gone up yet, and may well not do so, and are by and large avoidable by employing financial engineering. Starmer is quite obviously not Corbyn,
Taxes have been going up and the country has been becoming increasingly rubbish in noticeable ways. Presumably that's more to do with the government of the last fourteen years than that of the last eight weeks.
See the failed asylum flights. It shouldn't be the case that applying the existing rules efficiently and competently makes any difference, but it seems to be doing so.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
And with remote working now available to basically anyone suddenly people are much more mobile. Were I to go both my wife and I would keep our current jobs and we'd just shift to overseas payroll. I'd need to come to the London office for 2 working days per month and my wife's terms are 10 working days per quarter.
Yes. And of course all the “oh they’ll never go” lefty wankers ignore this. A revolution. I can do all my work abroad without a hitch. Even things like moving are so much easier. Books and music are all digital and kept on tiny devices
Plus British weather is shit and worsening and British towns are ugly and getting uglier and mass immigration is, shall we say, not necessarily always adding to the attractions of UK life
I noticed the other day that England and Wales have the highest rape rates in Europe. Higher than Sweden. Absolutely true. Go look for yourself
I thought we were going to be spared your ignorant shit sophisticated political commentary, and you were only coming back to talk about travel?
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Only if you think a big centre-left versus a big centre-right party is somehow an inevitability. Canada doesn’t have that. Japan doesn’t have that. France doesn’t currently have that. We could become like France, with Davey as Macron, or like Canada, with Davey as Trudeau.
Canada does have that. Every PM in Canadian history has been Liberal (left) or Conservative (right) in one iteration or another. The parties have died and evolved, but there's consistently been that left versus right divide.
Trudeau is Starmer not Davey.
Trudeau is possibly to the left of Davey, but he’s to the right of Starmer, I would’ve said.
The left-right positions move over time, Starmer is to the left of Blair but to the right of Attlee.
However the Liberals are Canada's centre-left party and fairly consistently have been. Canada has always been led by either a Liberal (left) or a Conservative (right), that's their divide.
Nature abhors a vacuum and left/right positions evolve relative to the nation, but there is rather consistently that left/right divide.
What you’re saying is that if there are two big parties, we should label one left and one right.
Well generally they label themselves that by staking out their positions relative to each other and differentiating themselves from each other.
Canada's Liberals are quite openly to the left of the Conservatives and vice-versa.
If the Lib Dems were to replace the Tories as the Opposition and were to do so with policies to the right of Labour, then the LDs would be our party of the centre right.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
And with remote working now available to basically anyone suddenly people are much more mobile. Were I to go both my wife and I would keep our current jobs and we'd just shift to overseas payroll. I'd need to come to the London office for 2 working days per month and my wife's terms are 10 working days per quarter.
Yes. And of course all the “oh they’ll never go” lefty wankers ignore this. A revolution. I can do all my work abroad without a hitch. Even things like moving are so much easier. Books and music are all digital and kept on tiny devices
Plus British weather is shit and worsening and British towns are ugly and getting uglier and mass immigration is, shall we say, not necessarily always adding to the attractions of UK life
I noticed the other day that England and Wales have the highest rape rates in Europe. Higher than Sweden. Absolutely true. Go look for yourself
All the more reason to fund a function criminal justice system that locks up rapists.
Unless of course you are a "high value" male who rather likes to get away with rape.
The Conservatives need Labour to screw up, which is how you win from Opposition. Then the Reform and Lib Dem problems will solve themselves. It also helps to give people some positive reasons to vote for them, but that's relatively minor.
Problem for the Tories is increasingly large parts of the UK are falling out of reach for them: London, Scotland, Wales mostly, increasingly the South of England thanks to the Lib Dem insurgency, and possibly the North of England following the failure of Johnson's Red Wall coalition.
Also the Tories are only getting solid support from the over 75s at the moment, which is unsustainable in the medium term obviously.
If people stop voting for Starmer's Labour party, their votes have to go somewhere, but they may not stack up very efficiently for the Conservatives.
I see further fragmentation of the party system happening. Voters wanting more "Tax and Spend*" are the ones becoming disenchanted with Starmer, and not obviously Tory inclined. They are more likely to go Green or Independent.
The Tories need to recruit a million voters to replace those lost to the grim reaper just to stand still, though Reeves plans to do that for them with her WFP policy.
*Tax (on others) and Spend (on people like me) which is a large part of the Reform vote, just with different values of "others" and of "people like me".
Yes, although I think there is also some cut-through with two tier Keir as voters contrast swift and decisive action against rioters (and more often, the riot-adjacent) with foot-dragging on other crimes from Carnival stabbings all the way down to shoplifting.
And the guy who actually hurled concrete at Farage. Suspended sentence. Compared with the guy who just hurled vocal abuse at Ed Miliband. 3 years in chokey.
Yes. Two Tier Kier is sticking. Because, true
Sorry to do this so soon after your return, but ... accuracy and context really matter. These sentences seem fair for the offences charged. KS does not decide sentences, as we know.
Nigel Farage. Not concrete, which would be eg a breeze block - but a handful of wet cement followed by a coffee cup, thrown across a road at NF upstairs on a bus.
No previous, and tried in a Magistrates' Court.
Ed Miliband. Michael Donaldson did not "hurl vocal abuse" at Ed Milliband; he threatened to kill him to his face, to be precise to "slit his throat". He was later heard saying whilst in custody " "Ed Miliband…. He will be in a body bag when I see him next".
“OH YOU'RE ED MILIBAND”, “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR THROAT", “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR FUCKING THROAT”, “I AM GOING TO DO IT NOW".
We have recently had two MPs murdered, and threats against people performing a public duty, drink, and previous offences are aggravating factors.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Only if you think a big centre-left versus a big centre-right party is somehow an inevitability. Canada doesn’t have that. Japan doesn’t have that. France doesn’t currently have that. We could become like France, with Davey as Macron, or like Canada, with Davey as Trudeau.
Canada does have that. Every PM in Canadian history has been Liberal (left) or Conservative (right) in one iteration or another. The parties have died and evolved, but there's consistently been that left versus right divide.
Trudeau is Starmer not Davey.
Trudeau is possibly to the left of Davey, but he’s to the right of Starmer, I would’ve said.
The left-right positions move over time, Starmer is to the left of Blair but to the right of Attlee.
However the Liberals are Canada's centre-left party and fairly consistently have been. Canada has always been led by either a Liberal (left) or a Conservative (right), that's their divide.
Nature abhors a vacuum and left/right positions evolve relative to the nation, but there is rather consistently that left/right divide.
Yes the positions are relative to the current centre, whatever that is.
If the Tories collapse, the Lib Dems will be the Centre Right party to Labour on the left. If Labour collapse, the Lib Dems will be the Centre Left party to the Tories on the right.
This would be without the Lib Dems choosing a left or right position or changing any values or policies.
The Conservatives need Labour to screw up, which is how you win from Opposition. Then the Reform and Lib Dem problems will solve themselves. It also helps to give people some positive reasons to vote for them, but that's relatively minor.
Problem for the Tories is increasingly large parts of the UK are falling out of reach for them: London, Scotland, Wales mostly, increasingly the South of England thanks to the Lib Dem insurgency, and possibly the North of England following the failure of Johnson's Red Wall coalition.
Also the Tories are only getting solid support from the over 75s at the moment, which is unsustainable in the medium term obviously.
If people stop voting for Starmer's Labour party, their votes have to go somewhere, but they may not stack up very efficiently for the Conservatives.
I see further fragmentation of the party system happening. Voters wanting more "Tax and Spend*" are the ones becoming disenchanted with Starmer, and not obviously Tory inclined. They are more likely to go Green or Independent.
The Tories need to recruit a million voters to replace those lost to the grim reaper just to stand still, though Reeves plans to do that for them with her WFP policy.
*Tax (on others) and Spend (on people like me) which is a large part of the Reform vote, just with different values of "others" and of "people like me".
Yes, although I think there is also some cut-through with two tier Keir as voters contrast swift and decisive action against rioters (and more often, the riot-adjacent) with foot-dragging on other crimes from Carnival stabbings all the way down to shoplifting.
And the guy who actually hurled concrete at Farage. Suspended sentence. Compared with the guy who just hurled vocal abuse at Ed Miliband. 3 years in chokey.
Yes. Two Tier Kier is sticking. Because, true
Sorry to do this so soon after your return, but ... accuracy and context really matter. These sentences seem fair for the offences charged. KS does not decide sentences, as we know.
Nigel Farage. Not concrete, which would be eg a breeze block - but a handful of wet cement followed by a coffee cup, thrown across a road at NF upstairs on a bus.
No previous, and tried in a Magistrates' Court.
Ed Miliband. Michael Donaldson did not "hurl vocal abuse" at Ed Milliband; he threatened to kill him to his face, to be precise to "slit his throat". He was later heard saying whilst in custody " "Ed Miliband…. He will be in a body bag when I see him next".
“OH YOU'RE ED MILIBAND”, “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR THROAT", “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR FUCKING THROAT”, “I AM GOING TO DO IT NOW".
We have recently had two MPs murdered, and threats against people performing a public duty, drink, and previous offences are aggravating factors.
Fake News. Two Tier Keir is personally ensuring that the so-called "hard right" - true patriots every one of them - are getting banged up for 10 years for no more than joshing whilst the insidious woke left get away with impaling Farage* with a spear
The Conservatives need Labour to screw up, which is how you win from Opposition. Then the Reform and Lib Dem problems will solve themselves. It also helps to give people some positive reasons to vote for them, but that's relatively minor.
Problem for the Tories is increasingly large parts of the UK are falling out of reach for them: London, Scotland, Wales mostly, increasingly the South of England thanks to the Lib Dem insurgency, and possibly the North of England following the failure of Johnson's Red Wall coalition.
Also the Tories are only getting solid support from the over 75s at the moment, which is unsustainable in the medium term obviously.
If people stop voting for Starmer's Labour party, their votes have to go somewhere, but they may not stack up very efficiently for the Conservatives.
I see further fragmentation of the party system happening. Voters wanting more "Tax and Spend*" are the ones becoming disenchanted with Starmer, and not obviously Tory inclined. They are more likely to go Green or Independent.
The Tories need to recruit a million voters to replace those lost to the grim reaper just to stand still, though Reeves plans to do that for them with her WFP policy.
*Tax (on others) and Spend (on people like me) which is a large part of the Reform vote, just with different values of "others" and of "people like me".
Yes, although I think there is also some cut-through with two tier Keir as voters contrast swift and decisive action against rioters (and more often, the riot-adjacent) with foot-dragging on other crimes from Carnival stabbings all the way down to shoplifting.
And the guy who actually hurled concrete at Farage. Suspended sentence. Compared with the guy who just hurled vocal abuse at Ed Miliband. 3 years in chokey.
Yes. Two Tier Kier is sticking. Because, true
Sorry to do this so soon after your return, but ... accuracy and context really matter. These sentences seem fair for the offences charged. KS does not decide sentences, as we know.
Nigel Farage. Not concrete, which would be eg a breeze block - but a handful of wet cement followed by a coffee cup, thrown across a road at NF upstairs on a bus.
No previous, and tried in a Magistrates' Court.
Ed Miliband. Michael Donaldson did not "hurl vocal abuse" at Ed Milliband; he threatened to kill him to his face, to be precise to "slit his throat". He was later heard saying whilst in custody " "Ed Miliband…. He will be in a body bag when I see him next".
“OH YOU'RE ED MILIBAND”, “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR THROAT", “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR FUCKING THROAT”, “I AM GOING TO DO IT NOW".
We have recently had two MPs murdered, and threats against people performing a public duty, drink, and previous offences are aggravating factors.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
The merger was 36 years ago. The young activists pounding the streets weren’t even weaned back then. Its relevance to the modern party is smaller than you believe.
As long as the LDs remain 4th on votes and 3rd on seats it is not very relevant, if the LDs ever want to replace the Tories or Labour as one of the 2 big parties though they have to pick a side
Not so. They can grow and occupy the middle ground without picking a side. Whether the Tories or Labour are squeezed out is up to each party. At the moment it looks more likely to be the Tories.
'Try to please everyone, end up pleasing no one.' See Nick Clegg 2010 and the outcome in 2015, campaigned from the centre left in 2010, governed from the centre right to 2015
I suspect the LibDems may be in a position to consolidate gains at the next election, should the Tories continue to tack to the right.
There were several seats they took where the tactical vote was unclear and where it will be more so next time, which may help reinforce majorities. What’s more, unencumbered by the need to lead opposition, LibDem MP’s will have the time to properly embed themselves in their constituencies. I anticipate quite a few of the new seats becoming quite sticky. In many ways they are a better fit for a liberal centrist party than the seats they held in 1997.
In my seat, Hamble Valley, Labour made much of one of the tactical voting sites saying to back Labour. In fact the Lib Dems pulled further ahead of Labour while the Conservatives won. Next time the tactical vote will be obvious.
What I really think about this "I will move unless my taxes go down" thing. I welcome everyone who is born here or has moved here when they make a commitment to the country. The others are just transactional. As with any "customer" we should aim to keep them happy as long as they keep paying.
Really? So for example you regarded EU citizens working here under FoM as a transactional arrangement?
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
PR at the moment would benefit the LDs, Reform, the Greens, even the Tories and SNP.
Ironically the only party who really benefit from FPTP now are Labour, winning almost 2/3 of MPs in July on just 33% of the vote
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
Thats Labour benefitting. It tends to help the biggest party whether Tory or Labour.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
WFH works for some jobs. It’s been a disaster for others.
The interesting bit is that it gives people on PAYE a way to vary their lifestyle and experiment with working abroad.
I know quite a few who’ve done stuff like rent a place for a few weeks and do long weekends of holiday - so working a 4 day week from the beach.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
And with remote working now available to basically anyone suddenly people are much more mobile. Were I to go both my wife and I would keep our current jobs and we'd just shift to overseas payroll. I'd need to come to the London office for 2 working days per month and my wife's terms are 10 working days per quarter.
It cost my employer only €500 a year to hire an Irish accountant to set up an Irish payroll to employ me over here. It's really very easy even for a small company.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
In Richmond, Lib Dems got 56% share of the vote in the last 2022 council elections and 48/54 seats. The Tories got 27% of the vote and 1/54 seats (now zero). That is ridiculously unfair. LDs still campaign for PR even though it would mean that the Tories would have approximately 15 seats on the Council.
"Brain drain" has been a popular meme since .. well, about as long as I can remember.
If people like Max and Casino decamp, it will have an effect - but not , I think, as great as they imagine.
(For the avoidance of doubt, I'd be sorry to see them go.)
Also, there's a difference between people going and their jobs going.
Most of us are eminently replaceable.
The thing is, when I moved to Ireland (for family reasons, rather than because the country was going to the dogs) I took my job with me. So now my work is effectively export earnings for Ireland, and it represents Britain paying for a service sector import.
WFH makes it a lot easier for jobs to move abroad too.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
Except that under PR(STV) the LDS would have run a completely different kind of campaign and got 20-25% share and seats.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
Except that under PR(STV) the LDS would have run a completely different kind of campaign and got 20-25% share and seats.
You have no idea if that is true. Pure speculation. I agree you can't directly predict that vote shares would stay the same but the idea that it is a gauranteed increase in vote share and seats for the Lib Dems is pie in the sky - I could just as easily claim that it would be a massive increase in vote share for Reform. I would hope in that case I would be wrong but it is no more outlandish an idea than yours.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
Except that under PR(STV) the LDS would have run a completely different kind of campaign and got 20-25% share and seats.
This fallacy has been going on for decades. Endless speculation on what would be the result if we changed the voting system and didn't tell either the parties or the voters! Because of course, in real life both campaigning and voting would change.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
The interesting split is that there are Conservatives like @TSE and was-but-can't-face-it-now Conservatives like me saying "hey guys, there's a real risk here". When Lib Dems throw the kitchen sink at a seat, they tend to win, because they are damn good at what they do. And national politics and polls mean diddly squat.
And (former) safe seats Conservatives don't seem to have a clue what is about to hit them. Take East Hampshire. Majority down from 20000 to 1300. And 5000 Labour votes to squeeze.
Gentlemen, it is time to leave the billiards room.
What I really think about this "I will move unless my taxes go down" thing. I welcome everyone who is born here or has moved here when they make a commitment to the country. The others are just transactional. As with any "customer" we should aim to keep them happy as long as they keep paying.
Really? So for example you regarded EU citizens working here under FoM as a transactional arrangement?
Depends on their commitment to our country. I don't object to people being transactional. But they shouldn't be surprised if we're transactional towards them too in that case. Pay your taxes.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
Except that under PR(STV) the LDS would have run a completely different kind of campaign and got 20-25% share and seats.
You have no idea if that is true. Pure speculation. I agree you can't directly predict that vote shares would stay the same but the idea that it is a gauranteed increase in vote share and seats for the Lib Dems is pie in the sky - I could just as easily claim that it would be a massive increase in vote share for Reform. I would hope in that case I would be wrong but it is no more outlandish an idea than yours.
You are right. Of course I made it up. How could I know? But it wasn't a pure guess. My assumption was an average of one seat in each 4 or 5 seat STV constituency. We'd need an effective national campaign as well as a series of effective local campaigns. More stretching.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
Except you do. Just see the 2010 general election (when the LDs got 23% on a social democratic manifesto) and compare it to the 2015 general election when the LDs collapsed to just 8% after most of the social democrats left and voted for Ed Miliband's Labour after Clegg took the LDs into government with the Tories
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, brought to you via the majestic scenery of Grand Island, Nebraska, as yet another megalong US goods train trundles by:
It makes sense, at the level of basic diplomacy, in the pursuit of common geostrategic interests and to please many of his own party’s supporters, for Sir Keir to strive to improve relations between the UK and its neighbours. There are signs for thinking that the effort is being reciprocated.
He wants to “turn a corner on Brexit”, and so should the EU. There’s no need to carry on rubbing it in that Britain made a terrible choice eight years ago because that is now so obvious and a chunky majority of British voters express feelings of Bregret.
The tone of the dialogue with our neighbours has definitely waxed warmer since Sir Keir moved into Number 10, but seasoned observers warn not to read too much into this yet. “People in the UK don’t realise just how bad our reputation is in the EU,” remarks Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform. “There’s a lot of work to do to rebuild trust and confidence, and convince them that Starmer isn’t just a nicer version of Rishi Sunak.” Handshakes for the cameras are easy. The real test is signatures on substantive agreements.
Any substantive improvement in the economic relationship will have to be negotiated with the European Commission. The botched Brexit deal agreed by Boris Johnson is up for review in 2025-26. It would require a massive effort and a lot of trust to break down the resistance in Brussels to a fundamental recasting.
In terms of what Sir Keir would like to gain on commerce, the publicly stated ambitions are modest: a veterinary agreement to reduce barriers to trade in food products, the removal of the impediments to touring musicians and other artists, and mutual recognition of professional qualifications. “This is, to put it mildly, quite a strange choice of objectives,” says Anand Menon, the director of UK in a Changing Europe. “Rather than picking low-hanging fruit, the government seems to have opted for targets that are neither low, nor particularly juicy.”
The NCSC is not fit for purpose. Governments buy Chinese infrastructure kit and put KGB-adjacent Russians into Parliament. Systems outsourced to foreign companies legally obliged to let their own governments look over their shoulders. Still it could be worse. We could pay hostile foreign powers to build nuclear power stations. What could possibly go wrong?
And as we've seen in this thread, workers with access to what should be secure systems are lolling around on foreign beaches without regard to information security. Go round your WFH friend's house and check they've a shredder next to their printer, and locks to keep their children and lovers from reading their screens, and soundproofing so confidential calls are not overheard.
And how do you know Elon Musk can't override the brakes on Teslas driven by people who call Twitter Twix?
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
And with remote working now available to basically anyone suddenly people are much more mobile. Were I to go both my wife and I would keep our current jobs and we'd just shift to overseas payroll. I'd need to come to the London office for 2 working days per month and my wife's terms are 10 working days per quarter.
Yes. And of course all the “oh they’ll never go” lefty wankers ignore this. A revolution. I can do all my work abroad without a hitch. Even things like moving are so much easier. Books and music are all digital and kept on tiny devices
Plus British weather is shit and worsening and British towns are ugly and getting uglier and mass immigration is, shall we say, not necessarily always adding to the attractions of UK life
I noticed the other day that England and Wales have the highest rape rates in Europe. Higher than Sweden. Absolutely true. Go look for yourself
Half the countries in Europe don't even have consent-based rape laws.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
Except you do. Just see the 2010 general election (when the LDs got 23% on a social democratic manifesto) and compare it to the 2015 general election when the LDs collapsed to just 8% after most of the social democrats left and voted for Ed Miliband's Labour after Clegg took the LDs into government with the Tories
That is just nonsense. You are misunderstanding cause and effect. It is a bit like my Doctor telling me to lose weight or I might die and I then get hit by lightning and he says 'I told you so'.
An on topic cycling story - one of two bizarre cycling stories in the press this weekend.
A Lib Dem Councillor (on topic!) called Paul Bennett on Malvern Hills DC was all over local media about how he had challenged Mountain Bikers on a hill fort called British Camp who were cycling in the area, how they swore at him, and abused him, and how he felt threatened. Media attention, police engaged - more patrols promised, lots of ranting on social media. https://www.malverngazette.co.uk/news/24544204.malvern-hills-british-camp-visitors-threatened-cyclists/
It now appears he may be a pork pie merchant. Unfortunately for some, there is some video and at least one independent witness.
It seems that he marched up to three people who were sitting looking at the view for the previous 45 minutes, having pushed their bikes from the path, and noisily abused *them*.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
Yep. But I would not choose to live anywhere else than England unless forced to. For all its many faults it is home and it is where I am comfortable.
Me too, and I commend your loyalty and patriotism despite our very different politics. I don't think I would emigrate myself by choice, at least not permenanantly, though I could be attracted to work in Africa for a few years while still fit. I can assure that it wouldn't be either for money or an easy life.
We all have to live under governments that we disagree with. Such is the nature of democracy, and the mature response to losing an election is to regroup, realise that your argument to the voters of Britain was rejected and to either adjust your ideas or arguments to regain influence.
"Brain drain" has been a popular meme since .. well, about as long as I can remember.
If people like Max and Casino decamp, it will have an effect - but not , I think, as great as they imagine.
(For the avoidance of doubt, I'd be sorry to see them go.)
The issue is that it’s now relatively easy for salaried professionals to work from where they wish. The likes of @Casino_Royale and @MaxPB are not in the top 1%, they’re in the top 5% which is where the real money gets raised. The £100k barrier means that tens of thousands of very productive people are either working four days or stuffing pensions for tax avoidance reasons.
It's not just people on very high incomes; I've noted that the propensity to work full time decreases rapidly from about £50,000 up if they have a partner. Consider salaried GPs. People value their children and their long weekends.
But yes, the £100k thing is an obvious thing to fix and oddly enough, a Labour government probably has more cover to do it than a Tory one if it's accompanied by other progressive policies.
The ASI had an interesting take on that effect wrt private schooling, the suggestion being that if parents decide to take their kids out of private school because the additional cost is too high, loads of them might then choose to go part time because they don't need the extra £20-30k per year to pay for fees. CR has literally suggested he's looking at that option right now so it's not as far fetched as some would like to believe. They think the loss of tax income from these people reducing their work hours could be pretty massive, coupled with the additional costs of schooling the kids exiting the private sector we might see a pretty big net increase in spend.
If these people go part-time, the work they were doing will presumably still need doing, so other people will get promotions, start earning more, and there will be little lost tax income.
That depends on what level of part time.
Many office based people are able to do what has traditionally been five days work in four days now as their productivity has increased with new technology and more efficient work practices.
And it is generally office based or wfh types who are talking about reducing their hours or emigrating.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
The interesting split is that there are Conservatives like @TSE and was-but-can't-face-it-now Conservatives like me saying "hey guys, there's a real risk here". When Lib Dems throw the kitchen sink at a seat, they tend to win, because they are damn good at what they do. And national politics and polls mean diddly squat.
And (former) safe seats Conservatives don't seem to have a clue what is about to hit them. Take East Hampshire. Majority down from 20000 to 1300. And 5000 Labour votes to squeeze.
Gentlemen, it is time to leave the billiards room.
An even bigger 6,476 Reform votes for the Tories to squeeze in East Hampshire too.
While if Tugendhat became Tory leader some of those 2024 LD voters would likely go Tory again next time
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, brought to you via the majestic scenery of Grand Island, Nebraska, as yet another megalong US goods train trundles by:
It makes sense, at the level of basic diplomacy, in the pursuit of common geostrategic interests and to please many of his own party’s supporters, for Sir Keir to strive to improve relations between the UK and its neighbours. There are signs for thinking that the effort is being reciprocated.
He wants to “turn a corner on Brexit”, and so should the EU. There’s no need to carry on rubbing it in that Britain made a terrible choice eight years ago because that is now so obvious and a chunky majority of British voters express feelings of Bregret.
The tone of the dialogue with our neighbours has definitely waxed warmer since Sir Keir moved into Number 10, but seasoned observers warn not to read too much into this yet. “People in the UK don’t realise just how bad our reputation is in the EU,” remarks Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform. “There’s a lot of work to do to rebuild trust and confidence, and convince them that Starmer isn’t just a nicer version of Rishi Sunak.” Handshakes for the cameras are easy. The real test is signatures on substantive agreements.
Any substantive improvement in the economic relationship will have to be negotiated with the European Commission. The botched Brexit deal agreed by Boris Johnson is up for review in 2025-26. It would require a massive effort and a lot of trust to break down the resistance in Brussels to a fundamental recasting.
In terms of what Sir Keir would like to gain on commerce, the publicly stated ambitions are modest: a veterinary agreement to reduce barriers to trade in food products, the removal of the impediments to touring musicians and other artists, and mutual recognition of professional qualifications. “This is, to put it mildly, quite a strange choice of objectives,” says Anand Menon, the director of UK in a Changing Europe. “Rather than picking low-hanging fruit, the government seems to have opted for targets that are neither low, nor particularly juicy.”
There are things Starmer can do to make the relationship with the EU work better but it's hard work and the baseline is the botched Johnson deal, not a hypothetical deal a better negotiator might have arrived at. The UK will need to make concessions to the EU from the baseline to get its own asks.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
Except that under PR(STV) the LDS would have run a completely different kind of campaign and got 20-25% share and seats.
This fallacy has been going on for decades. Endless speculation on what would be the result if we changed the voting system and didn't tell either the parties or the voters! Because of course, in real life both campaigning and voting would change.
We do know that vote shares for LD, Green and Reform (and its antecedents) go up in PR elections, as we see that in PR elections for the Euros, and in the case of LDs and Greens at least when looking at national vote shares projected from local elections.
So it is a reasonable assumption, but we don't know until we have a Westminster election by PR.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
The interesting split is that there are Conservatives like @TSE and was-but-can't-face-it-now Conservatives like me saying "hey guys, there's a real risk here". When Lib Dems throw the kitchen sink at a seat, they tend to win, because they are damn good at what they do. And national politics and polls mean diddly squat.
And (former) safe seats Conservatives don't seem to have a clue what is about to hit them. Take East Hampshire. Majority down from 20000 to 1300. And 5000 Labour votes to squeeze.
Gentlemen, it is time to leave the billiards room.
Yes we are and you can see the impact in seats where the Tories take it on board and where they don't. I give you two examples from years ago:
1) When we won Guildford for the first time I was very heavily involved in that campaign. It was a joint campaign with SW Surrey Liberals. We had the same team running both. SW Surrey was the number 1 target, Guildford number 2. The Tories were used to fighting us in SW Surrey and ran a decent campaign. They were crap in Guildford. We won Guildford and just missed SW Surrey.
2) Before Richmond became a LD stronghold for many elections it was our number 1 target and at every election we kept just missing it, while winning elsewhere. Why? Because the Tories were good at defending it, but we took them by surprise elsewhere and Richmond were used to the kitchen sink being thrown at them. Elsewhere not so.
An on topic cycling story - one of two bizarre cycling stories in the press this weekend.
A Lib Dem Councillor (on topic!) called Paul Bennett on Malvern Hills DC was all over local media about how he had challenged Mountain Bikers on a hill fort called British Camp who were cycling in the area, how they swore at him, and abused him, and how he felt threatened. Media attention, police engaged - more patrols promised, lots of ranting on social media. https://www.malverngazette.co.uk/news/24544204.malvern-hills-british-camp-visitors-threatened-cyclists/
It now appears he may be a pork pie merchant. Unfortunately for some, there is some video and at least one independent witness.
It seems that he marched up to three people who were sitting looking at the view for the previous 45 minutes, having pushed their bikes from the path, and noisily abused *them*.
An on topic cycling story - one of two bizarre cycling stories in the press this weekend.
A Lib Dem Councillor (on topic!) called Paul Bennett on Malvern Hills DC was all over local media about how he had challenged Mountain Bikers on a hill fort called British Camp who were cycling in the area, how they swore at him, and abused him, and how he felt threatened. Media attention, police engaged - more patrols promised, lots of ranting on social media. https://www.malverngazette.co.uk/news/24544204.malvern-hills-british-camp-visitors-threatened-cyclists/
It now appears he may be a pork pie merchant. Unfortunately for some, there is some video and at least one independent witness.
It seems that he marched up to three people who were sitting looking at the view for the previous 45 minutes, having pushed their bikes from the path, and noisily abused *them*.
The Conservatives need Labour to screw up, which is how you win from Opposition. Then the Reform and Lib Dem problems will solve themselves. It also helps to give people some positive reasons to vote for them, but that's relatively minor.
Problem for the Tories is increasingly large parts of the UK are falling out of reach for them: London, Scotland, Wales mostly, increasingly the South of England thanks to the Lib Dem insurgency, and possibly the North of England following the failure of Johnson's Red Wall coalition.
Also the Tories are only getting solid support from the over 75s at the moment, which is unsustainable in the medium term obviously.
If people stop voting for Starmer's Labour party, their votes have to go somewhere, but they may not stack up very efficiently for the Conservatives.
I see further fragmentation of the party system happening. Voters wanting more "Tax and Spend*" are the ones becoming disenchanted with Starmer, and not obviously Tory inclined. They are more likely to go Green or Independent.
The Tories need to recruit a million voters to replace those lost to the grim reaper just to stand still, though Reeves plans to do that for them with her WFP policy.
*Tax (on others) and Spend (on people like me) which is a large part of the Reform vote, just with different values of "others" and of "people like me".
Yes, although I think there is also some cut-through with two tier Keir as voters contrast swift and decisive action against rioters (and more often, the riot-adjacent) with foot-dragging on other crimes from Carnival stabbings all the way down to shoplifting.
And the guy who actually hurled concrete at Farage. Suspended sentence. Compared with the guy who just hurled vocal abuse at Ed Miliband. 3 years in chokey.
Yes. Two Tier Kier is sticking. Because, true
Sorry to do this so soon after your return, but ... accuracy and context really matter. These sentences seem fair for the offences charged. KS does not decide sentences, as we know.
Nigel Farage. Not concrete, which would be eg a breeze block - but a handful of wet cement followed by a coffee cup, thrown across a road at NF upstairs on a bus.
No previous, and tried in a Magistrates' Court.
Ed Miliband. Michael Donaldson did not "hurl vocal abuse" at Ed Milliband; he threatened to kill him to his face, to be precise to "slit his throat". He was later heard saying whilst in custody " "Ed Miliband…. He will be in a body bag when I see him next".
“OH YOU'RE ED MILIBAND”, “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR THROAT", “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR FUCKING THROAT”, “I AM GOING TO DO IT NOW".
We have recently had two MPs murdered, and threats against people performing a public duty, drink, and previous offences are aggravating factors.
So one question that arises from this thread is what happens to the Lib Dem commitment to PR?
Do they hold with their commitment to what they perceive as a fair electoral system - even though they run the risk of ending up in 4th place behind Labour, Tory and Reform - or do they decide that in the new normal they are better off sticking with FPTP which may welll see them as the official opposition at the next election or the one after?
For all my dislike of PR I hope they stick to their guns as it is bad to see parties and politicians abandoning long held beliefs simply for the sake of electoral advantage.
For the record I think they will stick with the PR commitment but it is perhaps a question worth asking at least.
Of course they will stick with PR. One rare election where they (almost) get a fair share of the seats, 11% of seats for 12% of votes is hardly going to move opinion.
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Except under PR they would have been 4th in seat share behind Reform and a very long way behind the Tories.
Except that under PR(STV) the LDS would have run a completely different kind of campaign and got 20-25% share and seats.
This fallacy has been going on for decades. Endless speculation on what would be the result if we changed the voting system and didn't tell either the parties or the voters! Because of course, in real life both campaigning and voting would change.
We do know that vote shares for LD, Green and Reform (and its antecedents) go up in PR elections, as we see that in PR elections for the Euros, and in the case of LDs and Greens at least when looking at national vote shares projected from local elections.
So it is a reasonable assumption, but we don't know until we have a Westminster election by PR.
Even there we cannot be sure we are not seeing NOTA votes when stakes are low, but yes, it may be the best sign we have.
"Brain drain" has been a popular meme since .. well, about as long as I can remember.
If people like Max and Casino decamp, it will have an effect - but not , I think, as great as they imagine.
(For the avoidance of doubt, I'd be sorry to see them go.)
The issue is that it’s now relatively easy for salaried professionals to work from where they wish. The likes of @Casino_Royale and @MaxPB are not in the top 1%, they’re in the top 5% which is where the real money gets raised. The £100k barrier means that tens of thousands of very productive people are either working four days or stuffing pensions for tax avoidance reasons.
I'm old enough to recall the celebration when Mrs T cut the top rate of income tax from 83% to 60%.
What I really think about this "I will move unless my taxes go down" thing. I welcome everyone who is born here or has moved here when they make a commitment to the country. The others are just transactional. As with any "customer" we should aim to keep them happy as long as they keep paying.
Really? So for example you regarded EU citizens working here under FoM as a transactional arrangement?
Quite - I know a number of French and Spanish people who are here because the taxes and employment rules mean that starting businesses here is possible.
Are they Transactional Tax Dodgers or Noble EU Citizens FoM’ing?
Voting rights for those citizens would certainly be a good thing.
Mitch McConnell says he worries that Democrats, if they win this election, will nuke the filibuster and make DC and Puerto Rico states, then set their sights on the Supreme Court. https://x.com/sahilkapur/status/1829682908782854168
Mitch McConnell is a hyperpartisan GOP hack most famous for blocking Obama's Supreme Court pick by simply refusing to schedule confirmation hearings. It's just that he has recently been out-partisaned by MAGA. He should not be mistaken for a country before party elder statesman.
No danger of that. As far as his 'worry' is concerned, bring it on.
Both filibuster and denial of full Congressional representation to DC and Puerto Rico are undemocratic.
Posts still reading top to bottom, for me at least.
We are stuck with for the foreseeable thanks to Vanilla. @rcs1000 has been looking into it. There was discussion on yesterday's thread.
I like it this way with the first post first rather than at the bottom
I hated having to scroll and reload until I reached the first post at the very bottom. In fact I stopped visiting PB because of it. If you have the thread with the most recent post first, invariably the conversation has left the header topic and you have to search to find out what on earth they are talking about.
So being ordered with the first post first is just fine by me
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, brought to you via the majestic scenery of Grand Island, Nebraska, as yet another megalong US goods train trundles by:
It makes sense, at the level of basic diplomacy, in the pursuit of common geostrategic interests and to please many of his own party’s supporters, for Sir Keir to strive to improve relations between the UK and its neighbours. There are signs for thinking that the effort is being reciprocated.
He wants to “turn a corner on Brexit”, and so should the EU. There’s no need to carry on rubbing it in that Britain made a terrible choice eight years ago because that is now so obvious and a chunky majority of British voters express feelings of Bregret.
The tone of the dialogue with our neighbours has definitely waxed warmer since Sir Keir moved into Number 10, but seasoned observers warn not to read too much into this yet. “People in the UK don’t realise just how bad our reputation is in the EU,” remarks Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform. “There’s a lot of work to do to rebuild trust and confidence, and convince them that Starmer isn’t just a nicer version of Rishi Sunak.” Handshakes for the cameras are easy. The real test is signatures on substantive agreements.
Any substantive improvement in the economic relationship will have to be negotiated with the European Commission. The botched Brexit deal agreed by Boris Johnson is up for review in 2025-26. It would require a massive effort and a lot of trust to break down the resistance in Brussels to a fundamental recasting.
In terms of what Sir Keir would like to gain on commerce, the publicly stated ambitions are modest: a veterinary agreement to reduce barriers to trade in food products, the removal of the impediments to touring musicians and other artists, and mutual recognition of professional qualifications. “This is, to put it mildly, quite a strange choice of objectives,” says Anand Menon, the director of UK in a Changing Europe. “Rather than picking low-hanging fruit, the government seems to have opted for targets that are neither low, nor particularly juicy.”
There are things Starmer can do to make the relationship with the EU work better but it's hard work and the baseline is the botched Johnson deal, not a hypothetical deal a better negotiator might have arrived at. The UK will need to make concessions to the EU from the baseline to get its own asks.
Of course. But if he doesn’t have the political capital now, when both Tories and Brexit are utterly discredited, then when?
An obvious example is pet travel - rejoining the pet passport scheme would be such a big win for Labour with the very many British pet travellers - yet Labour won’t even talk about it, determinedly ignoring the question when it’s put to them.
Posts still reading top to bottom, for me at least.
We are stuck with for the foreseeable thanks to Vanilla. @rcs1000 has been looking into it. There was discussion on yesterday's thread.
I like it this way with the first post first rather than at the bottom
I hated having to scroll and reload until I reached the first post at the very bottom. In fact I stopped visiting PB because of it. If you have the thread with the most recent post first, invariably the conversation has left the header topic and you have to search to find out what on earth they are talking about.
So being ordered with the first post first is just fine by me
Reading in order has always been possible by logging on via vf.politicalbetting.com, with the advantage of skipping though to the last page. You lose most of the header though.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
It will be entertaining once the dam breaks on WFH/Beach. At the moment, surprisingly few are doing it - many are those with links to whichever beach they are working from.
But how long before people start thinking of a long term let in Croatia or Portugal?
"Brain drain" has been a popular meme since .. well, about as long as I can remember.
If people like Max and Casino decamp, it will have an effect - but not , I think, as great as they imagine.
(For the avoidance of doubt, I'd be sorry to see them go.)
The issue is that it’s now relatively easy for salaried professionals to work from where they wish. The likes of @Casino_Royale and @MaxPB are not in the top 1%, they’re in the top 5% which is where the real money gets raised. The £100k barrier means that tens of thousands of very productive people are either working four days or stuffing pensions for tax avoidance reasons.
I'm old enough to recall the celebration when Mrs T cut the top rate of income tax from 83% to 60%.
I can recall HNW individuals then when it was further reduced to 50% commenting what @BartholomewRoberts was saying - 50% "feels fair" because the Govt doesn't get more than half of your money at the top end (ignoring presumably NIC and pensions).
I think that's fair and that the most RR could get away with would be 45% from £100k and 50% from £150k, and restore the personal allowance to everyone. That would more than break even (I think - have not run the numbers), but she has promised not to raise income tax so it is tricky and the other parties would jump all over it.
Where's the sweet spot for fixing this cliff edge?
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
It will be entertaining once the dam breaks on WFH/Beach. At the moment, surprisingly few are doing it - many are those with links to whichever beach they are working from.
But how long before people start thinking of a long term let in Croatia or Portugal?
Winter on Rhodes?
I have a friend who moves country regularly, most recently in Morocco, working digitally in San Francisco real estate. It seems to work for her. Presumably as a US citizen she just pays her tax there.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
The interesting split is that there are Conservatives like @TSE and was-but-can't-face-it-now Conservatives like me saying "hey guys, there's a real risk here". When Lib Dems throw the kitchen sink at a seat, they tend to win, because they are damn good at what they do. And national politics and polls mean diddly squat.
And (former) safe seats Conservatives don't seem to have a clue what is about to hit them. Take East Hampshire. Majority down from 20000 to 1300. And 5000 Labour votes to squeeze.
Gentlemen, it is time to leave the billiards room.
Yes we are and you can see the impact in seats where the Tories take it on board and where they don't. I give you two examples from years ago:
1) When we won Guildford for the first time I was very heavily involved in that campaign. It was a joint campaign with SW Surrey Liberals. We had the same team running both. SW Surrey was the number 1 target, Guildford number 2. The Tories were used to fighting us in SW Surrey and ran a decent campaign. They were crap in Guildford. We won Guildford and just missed SW Surrey.
2) Before Richmond became a LD stronghold for many elections it was our number 1 target and at every election we kept just missing it, while winning elsewhere. Why? Because the Tories were good at defending it, but we took them by surprise elsewhere and Richmond were used to the kitchen sink being thrown at them. Elsewhere not so.
My old ward was seen as safe Tory before we won it, and you’re right that where the Tories have complacently won without trying for decades, you do find the ‘single election address and just a few media appearances by the candidate’ type of campaign, that has never had to fight a serious election. Those seats are easier to hold, as it takes a few rounds for the Tories to work out how to fight a proper election. That was commonplace late last century; you’d think that with the challenge they’ve faced, at least in local elections, and the greater resources all the parties put into comms and training, that such redoubts of complacency would be fewer, nowadays?
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
It will be entertaining once the dam breaks on WFH/Beach. At the moment, surprisingly few are doing it - many are those with links to whichever beach they are working from.
But how long before people start thinking of a long term let in Croatia or Portugal?
Winter on Rhodes?
Yes it’s an epiphany when it happens. You suddenly realise - ‘wait. I don’t have to work from “home home” in drizzly Newent’
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
Conned into having full employment and pay rises.
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
Telling, though, that HYUFD doesn't think improving people's livs can work at the 'national level'. If that's a common attitude it explains much about the last decade of government.
I hear a lot on here about emigration, and I can't blame people for thinking seriously about it. I have friends and former colleagues who have done it, and enjoyed the experience immensely, though as always there are pros and cons - it's just how much one outweighs the other.
I would perhaps have considered it at some time in the past, but I don't think I would now. There is much about Britain I love, and I feel too rooted, even though I think we have been badly governed in recent decades.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
Conned into having full employment and pay rises.
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
Yet strangely those pay rises and full employment are forcing Brexiteer citizens of nowhere to flee these shores as the public sector has to match pay and conditions to keep staff.
It's almost as if they don't give a damn about levelling up.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
Conned into having full employment and pay rises.
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
Yet strangely those pay rises and full employment are forcing Brexiteer citizens of nowhere to flee these shores as the public sector has to match pay and conditions to keep staff.
It's almost as if they don't give a damn about levelling up.
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, brought to you via the majestic scenery of Grand Island, Nebraska, as yet another megalong US goods train trundles by:
It makes sense, at the level of basic diplomacy, in the pursuit of common geostrategic interests and to please many of his own party’s supporters, for Sir Keir to strive to improve relations between the UK and its neighbours. There are signs for thinking that the effort is being reciprocated.
He wants to “turn a corner on Brexit”, and so should the EU. There’s no need to carry on rubbing it in that Britain made a terrible choice eight years ago because that is now so obvious and a chunky majority of British voters express feelings of Bregret.
The tone of the dialogue with our neighbours has definitely waxed warmer since Sir Keir moved into Number 10, but seasoned observers warn not to read too much into this yet. “People in the UK don’t realise just how bad our reputation is in the EU,” remarks Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform. “There’s a lot of work to do to rebuild trust and confidence, and convince them that Starmer isn’t just a nicer version of Rishi Sunak.” Handshakes for the cameras are easy. The real test is signatures on substantive agreements.
Any substantive improvement in the economic relationship will have to be negotiated with the European Commission. The botched Brexit deal agreed by Boris Johnson is up for review in 2025-26. It would require a massive effort and a lot of trust to break down the resistance in Brussels to a fundamental recasting.
In terms of what Sir Keir would like to gain on commerce, the publicly stated ambitions are modest: a veterinary agreement to reduce barriers to trade in food products, the removal of the impediments to touring musicians and other artists, and mutual recognition of professional qualifications. “This is, to put it mildly, quite a strange choice of objectives,” says Anand Menon, the director of UK in a Changing Europe. “Rather than picking low-hanging fruit, the government seems to have opted for targets that are neither low, nor particularly juicy.”
There are things Starmer can do to make the relationship with the EU work better but it's hard work and the baseline is the botched Johnson deal, not a hypothetical deal a better negotiator might have arrived at. The UK will need to make concessions to the EU from the baseline to get its own asks.
Of course. But if he doesn’t have the political capital now, when both Tories and Brexit are utterly discredited, then when?
An obvious example is pet travel - rejoining the pet passport scheme would be such a big win for Labour with the very many British pet travellers - yet Labour won’t even talk about it, determinedly ignoring the question when it’s put to them.
I'm not sure if Starmer thinks he's going to transform the EU relationship or if he's just going through the motions. Neither bodes well for him politically given almost all Labour supporters think Brexit was a mistake
The Conservatives need Labour to screw up, which is how you win from Opposition. Then the Reform and Lib Dem problems will solve themselves. It also helps to give people some positive reasons to vote for them, but that's relatively minor.
Problem for the Tories is increasingly large parts of the UK are falling out of reach for them: London, Scotland, Wales mostly, increasingly the South of England thanks to the Lib Dem insurgency, and possibly the North of England following the failure of Johnson's Red Wall coalition.
Also the Tories are only getting solid support from the over 75s at the moment, which is unsustainable in the medium term obviously.
If people stop voting for Starmer's Labour party, their votes have to go somewhere, but they may not stack up very efficiently for the Conservatives.
I see further fragmentation of the party system happening. Voters wanting more "Tax and Spend*" are the ones becoming disenchanted with Starmer, and not obviously Tory inclined. They are more likely to go Green or Independent.
The Tories need to recruit a million voters to replace those lost to the grim reaper just to stand still, though Reeves plans to do that for them with her WFP policy.
*Tax (on others) and Spend (on people like me) which is a large part of the Reform vote, just with different values of "others" and of "people like me".
Yes, although I think there is also some cut-through with two tier Keir as voters contrast swift and decisive action against rioters (and more often, the riot-adjacent) with foot-dragging on other crimes from Carnival stabbings all the way down to shoplifting.
And the guy who actually hurled concrete at Farage. Suspended sentence. Compared with the guy who just hurled vocal abuse at Ed Miliband. 3 years in chokey.
Yes. Two Tier Kier is sticking. Because, true
Sorry to do this so soon after your return, but ... accuracy and context really matter. These sentences seem fair for the offences charged. KS does not decide sentences, as we know.
Nigel Farage. Not concrete, which would be eg a breeze block - but a handful of wet cement followed by a coffee cup, thrown across a road at NF upstairs on a bus.
No previous, and tried in a Magistrates' Court.
Ed Miliband. Michael Donaldson did not "hurl vocal abuse" at Ed Milliband; he threatened to kill him to his face, to be precise to "slit his throat". He was later heard saying whilst in custody " "Ed Miliband…. He will be in a body bag when I see him next".
“OH YOU'RE ED MILIBAND”, “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR THROAT", “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR FUCKING THROAT”, “I AM GOING TO DO IT NOW".
We have recently had two MPs murdered, and threats against people performing a public duty, drink, and previous offences are aggravating factors.
Nonetheless one DID violent things to Farage - suspended sentence
The other SAID violent things to Miliband - three years in prison
Yes - I agree that's accurate. But I think the sentences are about right; the Judge clearly wanted to give the Miliband one quite a lot more, and he has an 8 year restraining order, with a further up to 5 year sentence if he breaks it.
Posts still reading top to bottom, for me at least.
We are stuck with for the foreseeable thanks to Vanilla. @rcs1000 has been looking into it. There was discussion on yesterday's thread.
I like it this way with the first post first rather than at the bottom
I hated having to scroll and reload until I reached the first post at the very bottom. In fact I stopped visiting PB because of it. If you have the thread with the most recent post first, invariably the conversation has left the header topic and you have to search to find out what on earth they are talking about.
So being ordered with the first post first is just fine by me
I read the header on the main site, then click on the timestamp of the first comment which is a deep link to the vanilla comments.
From there it is one click to the last page (highest number), and the "home" and "end" keys on my keyboard do top and bottom of that page.
Keyboard shortcuts remain a great option after all these years.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
Conned into having full employment and pay rises.
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
Conned into having full employment and pay rises.
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
Yet strangely those pay rises and full employment are forcing Brexiteer citizens of nowhere to flee these shores as the public sector has to match pay and conditions to keep staff.
It's almost as if they don't give a damn about levelling up.
They're concerned about themselves being levelled down.
If the increased tax burden was to be imposed on others they might see things differently.
For myself, I'm not disagreeing with higher taxes on the rich or property owners and lower spending on oldies.
But I also support lower spending on the poor and workers having to work for longer and increase productivity.
In short, I believe we all are in it together and so everyone needs to contribute more and receive less.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
Conned into having full employment and pay rises.
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
Yet strangely those pay rises and full employment are forcing Brexiteer citizens of nowhere to flee these shores as the public sector has to match pay and conditions to keep staff.
It's almost as if they don't give a damn about levelling up.
For the LDs to eclipse the Tories they would have to become a genuine Orange Book centre right party and ditch the social democrats. Essentially the SDP wing of the LDs which merged with the Liberals in the 1980s would have to return to Labour. Only that would see the remaining One Nation centre right wing of the Tories permanently shift to the Liberals. The Tories would also need to lose their hard right ERG wing to Reform who would become the main party of populist Brexiteers and overtake the Tories too...
I think you're assuming an ideological coherence to the Lib Dem vote that isn't there. That's both their superpower and Achilles Heel.
The Lib Dem path to overtaking the Conservatives goes like this:
1. Identify thirty or so target seats. They will be overwhelmingly Conservative-held with a chunky Labour vote to squeeze, most will look like current Lib Dem seats- leafy. 2. Throw the kitchen sink at them for four to five years. 3. Err... 4. That's it really.
Nothing about social democracy vs. orange bookery. Everything about the failings of the government, the uselessnesses of your Tory MP and lots and lots of photos of potholes.
Half the LDs are social democrats, winning a few more Tory seats in by election style campaigns ain't making them anywhere near the main centre right party in the UK unless the Orange Bookers force the social democrats out and take full control
I know lots of LDs very well. I don't know who are "social democrats" and who are "Orange bookers" and I suspect neither do they. What unites us is making a real practical improvement to people's lives without ideological labels or hangups.
Well the LDs were formed by a merger of social democratic SDP supporters and classical liberal Liberals so I am afraid that division is there.
Yes LDs can get away with 'practical improvement to peoples' lives' at council level only when they promise to be better at repairing potholes than the Tories or Labour and blocking new homes on fields.
However that doesn't work at national level, to break into the main 2 parties either the Orange Book, classical liberal wing would have to win to have any chance of replacing the Tories as the main party of the centre right or the social democratic wing to have a chance of replacing Labour as the main party of the centre right if say Corbynites retook control of Labour.
@hyufd umpteen LDs have replied to you and 100% have said the same thing. We have no Social Democrat/Liberal split in the party and the voters generally (as opposed to political geeks like ourselves) have not a clue that the LDs are made up of Liberals and Social Democrats. I have not a clue what most of my LD colleagues are. I don't even know what my MP is. All I know is I am a Liberal and from discussions I am aware of maybe whether 1 or 2 are Liberals or Social Democrats. But for 99% I have not a clue and don't care.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
Telling, though, that HYUFD doesn't think improving people's livs can work at the 'national level'. If that's a common attitude it explains much about the last decade of government.
National government is about more than filling in potholes and opposing new housing on fields, which is what most LD councillors focus on locally. Nationally most voters vote either left or right based on their view of the state's level of intervention in the economy and cultural and social issues like immigration
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
Red, the NHS needs a huge shake up , not more money. No matter what you give them they jsut absorb it and get ever more bloated as waiting lists ger longer and longer. There is something far wrong with the NHS, great for real emergencies but shit at everything else.
An on topic cycling story - one of two bizarre cycling stories in the press this weekend.
A Lib Dem Councillor (on topic!) called Paul Bennett on Malvern Hills DC was all over local media about how he had challenged Mountain Bikers on a hill fort called British Camp who were cycling in the area, how they swore at him, and abused him, and how he felt threatened. Media attention, police engaged - more patrols promised, lots of ranting on social media. https://www.malverngazette.co.uk/news/24544204.malvern-hills-british-camp-visitors-threatened-cyclists/
It now appears he may be a pork pie merchant. Unfortunately for some, there is some video and at least one independent witness.
It seems that he marched up to three people who were sitting looking at the view for the previous 45 minutes, having pushed their bikes from the path, and noisily abused *them*.
In general, wheeling your bicycle through pedestrian only areas (or at junctions during a red light) seems to wind some people up no end.
People get angry about the stupidest things.
I've probably said this story before, but three decades ago I was at uni in London, and had to get the tube in each morning. I was on crutches, and me and a friend got into a packed tube train at South Woodford. A few stops later, a woman said angrily to me: "Do you have to use those things on the tube?"
Because, of course, I was only using the crutches to annoy her and steal a few precious square centimetres of space in the carriage.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
That was for the plebs. It's the high-value folk that can citizen anywhere
"Brain drain" has been a popular meme since .. well, about as long as I can remember.
If people like Max and Casino decamp, it will have an effect - but not , I think, as great as they imagine.
(For the avoidance of doubt, I'd be sorry to see them go.)
The issue is that it’s now relatively easy for salaried professionals to work from where they wish. The likes of @Casino_Royale and @MaxPB are not in the top 1%, they’re in the top 5% which is where the real money gets raised. The £100k barrier means that tens of thousands of very productive people are either working four days or stuffing pensions for tax avoidance reasons.
It's not just people on very high incomes; I've noted that the propensity to work full time decreases rapidly from about £50,000 up if they have a partner. Consider salaried GPs. People value their children and their long weekends.
But yes, the £100k thing is an obvious thing to fix and oddly enough, a Labour government probably has more cover to do it than a Tory one if it's accompanied by other progressive policies.
The ASI had an interesting take on that effect wrt private schooling, the suggestion being that if parents decide to take their kids out of private school because the additional cost is too high, loads of them might then choose to go part time because they don't need the extra £20-30k per year to pay for fees. CR has literally suggested he's looking at that option right now so it's not as far fetched as some would like to believe. They think the loss of tax income from these people reducing their work hours could be pretty massive, coupled with the additional costs of schooling the kids exiting the private sector we might see a pretty big net increase in spend.
If these people go part-time, the work they were doing will presumably still need doing, so other people will get promotions, start earning more, and there will be little lost tax income.
Yes there are loads of people with those skills just wandering the streets waiting to slot in. What planet are you on, he gets the big money for a reason.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
That was for the plebs. It's the high-value folk that can citizen anywhere
WFH is great.
It can be great for some people, if the role allows it. For others, it can be distancing, lonely, and unproductive. Oh, and insecure.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
And with remote working now available to basically anyone suddenly people are much more mobile. Were I to go both my wife and I would keep our current jobs and we'd just shift to overseas payroll. I'd need to come to the London office for 2 working days per month and my wife's terms are 10 working days per quarter.
Yes. And of course all the “oh they’ll never go” lefty wankers ignore this. A revolution. I can do all my work abroad without a hitch. Even things like moving are so much easier. Books and music are all digital and kept on tiny devices
Plus British weather is shit and worsening and British towns are ugly and getting uglier and mass immigration is, shall we say, not necessarily always adding to the attractions of UK life
I noticed the other day that England and Wales have the highest rape rates in Europe. Higher than Sweden. Absolutely true. Go look for yourself
I thought we were going to be spared your ignorant shit sophisticated political commentary, and you were only coming back to talk about travel?
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
It will be entertaining once the dam breaks on WFH/Beach. At the moment, surprisingly few are doing it - many are those with links to whichever beach they are working from.
But how long before people start thinking of a long term let in Croatia or Portugal?
Winter on Rhodes?
The most powerful man in the world seems to have adopted that approach:
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, brought to you via the majestic scenery of Grand Island, Nebraska, as yet another megalong US goods train trundles by:
It makes sense, at the level of basic diplomacy, in the pursuit of common geostrategic interests and to please many of his own party’s supporters, for Sir Keir to strive to improve relations between the UK and its neighbours. There are signs for thinking that the effort is being reciprocated.
He wants to “turn a corner on Brexit”, and so should the EU. There’s no need to carry on rubbing it in that Britain made a terrible choice eight years ago because that is now so obvious and a chunky majority of British voters express feelings of Bregret.
The tone of the dialogue with our neighbours has definitely waxed warmer since Sir Keir moved into Number 10, but seasoned observers warn not to read too much into this yet. “People in the UK don’t realise just how bad our reputation is in the EU,” remarks Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform. “There’s a lot of work to do to rebuild trust and confidence, and convince them that Starmer isn’t just a nicer version of Rishi Sunak.” Handshakes for the cameras are easy. The real test is signatures on substantive agreements.
Any substantive improvement in the economic relationship will have to be negotiated with the European Commission. The botched Brexit deal agreed by Boris Johnson is up for review in 2025-26. It would require a massive effort and a lot of trust to break down the resistance in Brussels to a fundamental recasting.
In terms of what Sir Keir would like to gain on commerce, the publicly stated ambitions are modest: a veterinary agreement to reduce barriers to trade in food products, the removal of the impediments to touring musicians and other artists, and mutual recognition of professional qualifications. “This is, to put it mildly, quite a strange choice of objectives,” says Anand Menon, the director of UK in a Changing Europe. “Rather than picking low-hanging fruit, the government seems to have opted for targets that are neither low, nor particularly juicy.”
There are things Starmer can do to make the relationship with the EU work better but it's hard work and the baseline is the botched Johnson deal, not a hypothetical deal a better negotiator might have arrived at. The UK will need to make concessions to the EU from the baseline to get its own asks.
Of course. But if he doesn’t have the political capital now, when both Tories and Brexit are utterly discredited, then when?
An obvious example is pet travel - rejoining the pet passport scheme would be such a big win for Labour with the very many British pet travellers - yet Labour won’t even talk about it, determinedly ignoring the question when it’s put to them.
They would rather torture poor pensioners, and spoil any enjoyment people have, trying to pretend that stopping smoking in pub beer gardens will eradicate smoking and save the NHS. These people are so stupid they are dangerous.
That will really encourage Israel to stop for sure.
I remember thinking back in October that, given Hamas must have calculated on a very strong Israeli response when planning the massacre, in order to confound Hamas Israel would have to react in a way Hamas weren't expecting.
That would either mean "under-reacting" or "over-reacting". As the former (turning the other cheek) would have been politically unacceptable then, as sure as eggs are eggs, "over-reacting" it would be. And so here we are. Gaza flattened and Israeli air-strikes on Hamas leaders wherever they happen to be operating, even if it's in Iran. Presumably the Hamas planners didn't plan on being dead.
The sad truth is that no-one is really interested in the Palestinians including - in fact, especially - their fellow Muslim Arabs. At least not those in government. Gaza is not important economically, militarily, or in any other way to those playing realpolitik. I'm struggling to see how any of this ends.
That will really encourage Israel to stop for sure.
I remember thinking back in October that, given Hamas must have calculated on a very strong Israeli response when planning the massacre, in order to confound Hamas Israel would have to react in a way Hamas weren't expecting.
That would either mean "under-reacting" or "over-reacting". As the former (turning the other cheek) would have been politically unacceptable then, as sure as eggs are eggs, "over-reacting" it would be. And so here we are. Gaza flattened and Israeli air-strikes on Hamas leaders wherever they happen to be operating, even if it's in Iran. Presumably the Hamas planners didn't plan on being dead.
The sad truth is that no-one is really interested in the Palestinians including - in fact, especially - their fellow Muslim Arabs. At least not those in government. Gaza is not important economically, militarily, or in any other way to those playing realpolitik. I'm struggling to see how any of this ends.
Can only end badly for Palstinians for sure and for sure anyone they think is Hamas will be done for no matter how long it takes.
People worried about paying higher taxes are worried about seeing no return for their taxes. What is needed is quick and easy evidence of improvement. Something like a blitz on potholes would do the job. Unfortunately, fixing the NHS, our infrastructure or the asylum system won’t be quick or easy, but if people see something positive happening, they will be more patient with fixing the big issues.
One thing that I find interesting is the *type* of people who are thinking of moving.
Not just business owners, but employees on high salaries. And given the collapse in contracting, these people are nearly all on PAYE.
So the idea that they aren’t paying a lot of tax already is simply impossible.
I would never consider leaving England under any circumstances short of civil war. But from a purely monetary point of view it would certainly be tempting. Currently I pay 49% of my turnover in tax which I think is a ridiculous state of affairs.
More likely, as Labour destroy our energy independence and we move to more and more imports, I will probably move back to working overseas permanently on rotation. Not something I want to do but needs must. It improves both my job prospects and my tax situation. I will still be providing the UK with oil and gas - I will just be doing it from the Middle East or South America.
Many multinationals are offering working from any country they have an office in.
It’s the flip side of WFH.
I seem to recall a lot of Tories saying WFH was terrible and people needed to go back to the office.
There’s a difference between them, who can be trusted to WFH, and the oiks they employ, who can’t.
Ah, yes, like there’s a difference between them, who can be trusted with freedom of movement, and the oiks they employ, who can’t!
And whom they conned into voting for Brexit.
Conned into having full employment and pay rises.
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
Yet strangely those pay rises and full employment are forcing Brexiteer citizens of nowhere to flee these shores as the public sector has to match pay and conditions to keep staff.
It's almost as if they don't give a damn about levelling up.
Why are you so angry recently?
I am not angry.
A bit tetchy about Brexiteers who whinge about paying for what they voted for, higher pay for their fellow citizens and levelling up of neglected areas, levelling up requiring relative progress compared with their own favoured areas. It isn't ex miners in Mansfield talking of going into tax exile.
What Farage really needs is a by-election in a Labour-held WWC seat. Say in the north Midlands, south Yorkshire, or County Durham. I suspect Reform would walk it. That would be like putting a very big cat among the pigeons.
What Farage really needs is a by-election in a Labour-held WWC seat. Say in the north Midlands, south Yorkshire, or County Durham. I suspect Reform would walk it. That would be like putting a very big cat among the pigeons.
We're getting a German version of that type of election today in Saxony and Thuringia.
Comments
In Japan by contrast their LDs are the main party of the centre right with the opposition Constitutional Democratic party the main party of the centre left. In France Macron's party is now the main centre right party effectively and was second behind Melenchon's socialist left block in the recent legislative elections and beat Le Pen in the run off of the 2022 presidential election, in both elections Macron and his party getting most of the preferences of Les Republicains voters (LR formerly the main French centre right party).
In Australia of course the Liberals are the main centre right party too in alliance with the conservative Nationals against the centre left Australian Labor party currently in government.
So to get into the big 2 the Liberals would either have to go centre left like Trudeau or centre right like Macron or say the Australian Liberals when they were led by Malcolm Turnbull
1) their income and wealth is derived from here, and they lose touch when they leave.
2) these "high worth" individuals have enough income to enjoy a lifestyle (generally in London) that exceeds the lifestyle in other parts of the world.
3) the novelty of living in a Sardinian villa surrounded by Mafia wears off fairly quickly
4) and most importantly, taxes have not gone up yet, and may well not do so, and are by and large avoidable by employing financial engineering. Starmer is quite obviously not Corbyn,
On the other hand, what will need to be sorted out before it reaches critical mass is people extending WFH to mean work from whatever beach they fancy with no regard to local law or taxes, or their employer's liabilities and obligations.
However the Liberals are Canada's centre-left party and fairly consistently have been. Canada has always been led by either a Liberal (left) or a Conservative (right), that's their divide.
Nature abhors a vacuum and left/right positions evolve relative to the nation, but there is rather consistently that left/right divide.
See the failed asylum flights. It shouldn't be the case that applying the existing rules efficiently and competently makes any difference, but it seems to be doing so.
Canada's Liberals are quite openly to the left of the Conservatives and vice-versa.
If the Lib Dems were to replace the Tories as the Opposition and were to do so with policies to the right of Labour, then the LDs would be our party of the centre right.
Unless of course you are a "high value" male who rather likes to get away with rape.
Nigel Farage. Not concrete, which would be eg a breeze block - but a handful of wet cement followed by a coffee cup, thrown across a road at NF upstairs on a bus.
No previous, and tried in a Magistrates' Court.
Ed Miliband. Michael Donaldson did not "hurl vocal abuse" at Ed Milliband; he threatened to kill him to his face, to be precise to "slit his throat". He was later heard saying whilst in custody " "Ed Miliband…. He will be in a body bag when I see him next".
“OH YOU'RE ED MILIBAND”, “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR THROAT", “I AM GOING TO SLIT YOUR FUCKING THROAT”, “I AM GOING TO DO IT NOW".
We have recently had two MPs murdered, and threats against people performing a public duty, drink, and previous offences are aggravating factors.
"https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2024-08-30/doncaster-man-who-threatened-to-slit-throat-of-mp-is-jailed
Sentencing remarks:
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/R-v-Donaldson-Sentencing-Remarks-29-August-2024.pdf
If the Tories collapse, the Lib Dems will be the Centre Right party to Labour on the left. If Labour collapse, the Lib Dems will be the Centre Left party to the Tories on the right.
This would be without the Lib Dems choosing a left or right position or changing any values or policies.
*he got better
/s
Now if somehow the LDs had got the Labour results of 63% of seats and 33% of voters I suspect they would find a way to avoid implementation (royal commission and referendum), so yes parties are hugely cynical on PR, but even this time the LDs have a lower share of seats than votes.
Ironically the only party who really benefit from FPTP now are Labour, winning almost 2/3 of MPs in July on just 33% of the vote
The interesting bit is that it gives people on PAYE a way to vary their lifestyle and experiment with working abroad.
I know quite a few who’ve done stuff like rent a place for a few weeks and do long weekends of holiday - so working a 4 day week from the beach.
From there it’s easy to increase….
The Tories got 27% of the vote and 1/54 seats (now zero).
That is ridiculously unfair. LDs still campaign for PR even though it would mean that the Tories would have approximately 15 seats on the Council.
WFH makes it a lot easier for jobs to move abroad too.
The merger was decades ago. It is now entirely irrelevant. Nobody cares. Literally nobody at all.
Now we are all LDs and you are a Tory so you are not inside the party to see what we think. Don't you think it would make sense to take on board what we actually know from our combined experience.
That is not to say sometime in the future a split might not happen and if PR was implemented I would expect it to happen, but as is there really is no such groupings in the LDs at all.
"Chinese hackers could shut down UK hospitals and steal Royal Family's medical files 'at the flick of a switch', security experts warn"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13800587/Chinese-hackers-shut-UK-hospitals-steal-Royal-Familys-medical-files.html
And (former) safe seats Conservatives don't seem to have a clue what is about to hit them. Take East Hampshire. Majority down from 20000 to 1300. And 5000 Labour votes to squeeze.
Gentlemen, it is time to leave the billiards room.
It makes sense, at the level of basic diplomacy, in the pursuit of common geostrategic interests and to please many of his own party’s supporters, for Sir Keir to strive to improve relations between the UK and its neighbours. There are signs for thinking that the effort is being reciprocated.
He wants to “turn a corner on Brexit”, and so should the EU. There’s no need to carry on rubbing it in that Britain made a terrible choice eight years ago because that is now so obvious and a chunky majority of British voters express feelings of Bregret.
The tone of the dialogue with our neighbours has definitely waxed warmer since Sir Keir moved into Number 10, but seasoned observers warn not to read too much into this yet. “People in the UK don’t realise just how bad our reputation is in the EU,” remarks Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform. “There’s a lot of work to do to rebuild trust and confidence, and convince them that Starmer isn’t just a nicer version of Rishi Sunak.” Handshakes for the cameras are easy. The real test is signatures on substantive agreements.
Any substantive improvement in the economic relationship will have to be negotiated with the European Commission. The botched Brexit deal agreed by Boris Johnson is up for review in 2025-26. It would require a massive effort and a lot of trust to break down the resistance in Brussels to a fundamental recasting.
In terms of what Sir Keir would like to gain on commerce, the publicly stated ambitions are modest: a veterinary agreement to reduce barriers to trade in food products, the removal of the impediments to touring musicians and other artists, and mutual recognition of professional qualifications. “This is, to put it mildly, quite a strange choice of objectives,” says Anand Menon, the director of UK in a Changing Europe. “Rather than picking low-hanging fruit, the government seems to have opted for targets that are neither low, nor particularly juicy.”
And as we've seen in this thread, workers with access to what should be secure systems are lolling around on foreign beaches without regard to information security. Go round your WFH friend's house and check they've a shredder next to their printer, and locks to keep their children and lovers from reading their screens, and soundproofing so confidential calls are not overheard.
And how do you know Elon Musk can't override the brakes on Teslas driven by people who call Twitter Twix?
A Lib Dem Councillor (on topic!) called Paul Bennett on Malvern Hills DC was all over local media about how he had challenged Mountain Bikers on a hill fort called British Camp who were cycling in the area, how they swore at him, and abused him, and how he felt threatened. Media attention, police engaged - more patrols promised, lots of ranting on social media.
https://www.malverngazette.co.uk/news/24544204.malvern-hills-british-camp-visitors-threatened-cyclists/
It now appears he may be a pork pie merchant. Unfortunately for some, there is some video and at least one independent witness.
It seems that he marched up to three people who were sitting looking at the view for the previous 45 minutes, having pushed their bikes from the path, and noisily abused *them*.
Here's the account this week in Road.cc. It's looking like a Council disciplinary complaint and possibly a police referral, since he has not come forward yet to withdraw his claim and apologise.
https://road.cc/content/news/cyclists-accused-abusing-councillor-say-he-ranted-them-310105
It's a crazy life.
We all have to live under governments that we disagree with. Such is the nature of democracy, and the mature response to losing an election is to regroup, realise that your argument to the voters of Britain was rejected and to either adjust your ideas or arguments to regain influence.
Many office based people are able to do what has traditionally been five days work in four days now as their productivity has increased with new technology and more efficient work practices.
And it is generally office based or wfh types who are talking about reducing their hours or emigrating.
While if Tugendhat became Tory leader some of those 2024 LD voters would likely go Tory again next time
So it is a reasonable assumption, but we don't know until we have a Westminster election by PR.
1) When we won Guildford for the first time I was very heavily involved in that campaign. It was a joint campaign with SW Surrey Liberals. We had the same team running both. SW Surrey was the number 1 target, Guildford number 2. The Tories were used to fighting us in SW Surrey and ran a decent campaign. They were crap in Guildford. We won Guildford and just missed SW Surrey.
2) Before Richmond became a LD stronghold for many elections it was our number 1 target and at every election we kept just missing it, while winning elsewhere. Why? Because the Tories were good at defending it, but we took them by surprise elsewhere and Richmond were used to the kitchen sink being thrown at them. Elsewhere not so.
In general, wheeling your bicycle through pedestrian only areas (or at junctions during a red light) seems to wind some people up no end.
The other SAID violent things to Miliband - three years in prison
Are they Transactional Tax Dodgers or Noble EU Citizens FoM’ing?
As far as his 'worry' is concerned, bring it on.
Both filibuster and denial of full Congressional representation to DC and Puerto Rico are undemocratic.
I hated having to scroll and reload until I reached the first post at the very bottom. In fact I stopped visiting PB because of it. If you have the thread with the most recent post first, invariably the conversation has left the header topic and you have to search to find out what on earth they are talking about.
So being ordered with the first post first is just fine by me
An obvious example is pet travel - rejoining the pet passport scheme would be such a big win for Labour with the very many British pet travellers - yet Labour won’t even talk about it, determinedly ignoring the question when it’s put to them.
But how long before people start thinking of a long term let in Croatia or Portugal?
Winter on Rhodes?
I think that's fair and that the most RR could get away with would be 45% from £100k and 50% from £150k, and restore the personal allowance to everyone. That would more than break even (I think - have not run the numbers), but she has promised not to raise income tax so it is tricky and the other parties would jump all over it.
Where's the sweet spot for fixing this cliff edge?
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-work-from-home-when-you-can-work-from-paradise/
But how terrible that they've lost their 'right' to pick turnips in Transylvania.
If that's a common attitude it explains much about the last decade of government.
I would perhaps have considered it at some time in the past, but I don't think I would now. There is much about Britain I love, and I feel too rooted, even though I think we have been badly governed in recent decades.
It's almost as if they don't give a damn about levelling up.
From there it is one click to the last page (highest number), and the "home" and "end" keys on my keyboard do top and bottom of that page.
Keyboard shortcuts remain a great option after all these years.
If the increased tax burden was to be imposed on others they might see things differently.
For myself, I'm not disagreeing with higher taxes on the rich or property owners and lower spending on oldies.
But I also support lower spending on the poor and workers having to work for longer and increase productivity.
In short, I believe we all are in it together and so everyone needs to contribute more and receive less.
anger
bargaining
depression
acceptance
CNN: How would this work if a state bans IVF?
Vance: That's a ridiculous hypothetical.
CNN: It happened in Alabama. And you voted against a bill to protect IVF access.
Vance: I voted for religious liberty.
https://x.com/GavinNewsom/status/1829552273795825968
I've probably said this story before, but three decades ago I was at uni in London, and had to get the tube in each morning. I was on crutches, and me and a friend got into a packed tube train at South Woodford. A few stops later, a woman said angrily to me: "Do you have to use those things on the tube?"
Because, of course, I was only using the crutches to annoy her and steal a few precious square centimetres of space in the carriage.
"An NHS Trust is investigating after reports a man was slumped dead over a table in a hospital coffee shop for several hours."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy841lvd27ro
🟥 Labour: 30%
🟦 Tory: 26%
🟪 Reform: 19%
🟧 Lib Dems: 11%
🟩 Greens: 7%
That would either mean "under-reacting" or "over-reacting". As the former (turning the other cheek) would have been politically unacceptable then, as sure as eggs are eggs, "over-reacting" it would be. And so here we are. Gaza flattened and Israeli air-strikes on Hamas leaders wherever they happen to be operating, even if it's in Iran. Presumably the Hamas planners didn't plan on being dead.
The sad truth is that no-one is really interested in the Palestinians including - in fact, especially - their fellow Muslim Arabs. At least not those in government. Gaza is not important economically, militarily, or in any other way to those playing realpolitik. I'm struggling to see how any of this ends.
A bit tetchy about Brexiteers who whinge about paying for what they voted for, higher pay for their fellow citizens and levelling up of neglected areas, levelling up requiring relative progress compared with their own favoured areas. It isn't ex miners in Mansfield talking of going into tax exile.