Smoking, like cash, will soon be obsolete for younger generations – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
I don't get your Luddite obsession with cash.Andy_JS said:Support cash if you can.
The sooner cash is eliminated the better. Filthy, dangerous, horrid thing.0 -
On this poll the SocDems are up 3.1% on 2020 and Aontu are up 2.1%HYUFD said:
I suspect a big smirk on Michael Martin's face on election night as the fresh faced young Harris has seen his big lead collapse to nothing after his gaffe with a carer and his FG will now end up junior partner again to MM's FF.LostPassword said:The final opinion poll for the Irish election has been published. The results are pretty much inline with the last couple of polls. Fine Gael are down, Sinn Fein are up, the big three parties are near enough level, and there's no sign of any small party in particular having caught the public's imagination - none have polled higher than 6%. The scores from the Red C/Business Post poll are:
Fianna Fail 21%
Fine Gael 20%
Sinn Fein 20%
Social Democrats 6%
Labour 4%
Greens 4%
Aontu 4%
Independent Ireland 4%
People Before Profit-Solidarity 2%
Other parties 1%
Independents 14%
An exit poll is promised, though I don't know what its track record has been.
Compared to the last Irish election in 2020 though SF are the biggest losers down 4%, FF down 1% and FG unchanged.
Of the minor parties the Greens down 3%, Labour and PBF unchanged and Aontu the biggest gainers up almost 3%
"Aontu the biggest gainers."
Although, the SocDems are standing only 26 candidates, while Aontu have a candidate in every one of the 43 constituencies.0 -
Mixing the conversations of cash and petrol stations, when I went to it a few days ago I joined the queue to pay and there was a lady at the front paying in stacks of coins which took ages to get counted. Stood there waiting while piles of coins were counted, then when she finished she turned around and saw the large queue behind her and said "oh, there wasn't a queue when I arrived".Anabobazina said:
And indeed for many customers, who have come to realise that cash is pointless.BartholomewRoberts said:
In the future having scraps paper and tin in your pocket will be as niche as having a chequebook is.Anabobazina said:
A very wise move. Few customers use cash, there’s no point M&S persisting with it, given the cost, risk and labour involved in handling it. Many retailers are moving that way: the march of online shopping has rendered cash-handling a competitive disadvantage.Andy_JS said:>My local Marks and Spencer cafe has just become cashless. Disappointing. You also have to use big screens to order things, like in McDonalds or Burger King.
Interestingly, the new pub opening near me is cashless.
The future is already here for many firms.
No, I bet there wasn't!
Thankfully after she'd gone everyone else in front of me wasn't dicking around with cash and then I could just pay contactless myself.1 -
Aontu and Independent Ireland doing well could well be the story of this election, though at the moment it's mostly notable for the very modest changes on nearly five years ago.HYUFD said:
They may but have been leaking to Aontu, who as the most anti immigration and anti abortion of the Irish parties shows even Ireland is not immune to the western swing to the populist rightLostPassword said:One thing to bear in mind with the Irish election is that Sinn Fein have been much more ambitious with their candidate selection this time. They have 71 candidates, while in 2020 they stood only 42, of which 37 were elected. If they had stood more candidates in 2020 it's generally thought that they would have had more TDs elected, so they could make quite a few gains even with roughly the same vote share split, which was 24.5% - 22.2% - 20.9% for SF - FF - FG last time.
1 -
What a good question. You are wondering if they can maintain efficiency of vote with extra candidates?LostPassword said:One thing to bear in mind with the Irish election is that Sinn Fein have been much more ambitious with their candidate selection this time. They have 71 candidates, while in 2020 they stood only 42, of which 37 were elected. If they had stood more candidates in 2020 it's generally thought that they would have had more TDs elected, so they could make quite a few gains even with roughly the same vote share split, which was 24.5% - 22.2% - 20.9% for SF - FF - FG last time.
Last time they must have targeted their most winnable, now stretching to least winnable targets? Yet it being great unknown how they do in these new targets, and they could win most through vote efficiency?
We know who forms the government though, it won’t come as a surprise, with FF still no intention to coalition with SF, that it’s another FF-FG coalition.
Back to SF standing more candidates, and my question, have FG and FF areas hardly shifted down the decades, guaranteeing them rock solid areas, for want of a better term the government changing “swing states” always tend to be the same ones as well? So is it right to guess, in such a 2 party system for so long, SF are a far greater threat in FF heartlands than FG heartlands?0 -
Fridge full of fruit "cider" and Corona and a shelf of coloured gins as well, if the neck oil is off there's nothing worth drinking.Theuniondivvie said:
For a moment I was getting my head round Bibi having Carling on tap in his man cave.Anabobazina said:
Madri and Carling are utter shit. He has two pumps of Carling.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
https://x.com/DalrympleWill/status/1721163356051288412?lang=en
Anyway move over over Jeremy Clarkson. Is this the PB Tories' newly minted Greatest Living Englishman?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr4ly6p2wxvo.amp0 -
Ha! That’s another (less cited) reason why lots of shops and cafes etc have gone cashless… it only takes one crackpot to insist on paying in coinage and they risk losing customers due to the queue.BartholomewRoberts said:
Mixing the conversations of cash and petrol stations, when I went to it a few days ago I joined the queue to pay and there was a lady at the front paying in stacks of coins which took ages to get counted. Stood there waiting while piles of coins were counted, then when she finished she turned around and saw the large queue behind her and said "oh, there wasn't a queue when I arrived".Anabobazina said:
And indeed for many customers, who have come to realise that cash is pointless.BartholomewRoberts said:
In the future having scraps paper and tin in your pocket will be as niche as having a chequebook is.Anabobazina said:
A very wise move. Few customers use cash, there’s no point M&S persisting with it, given the cost, risk and labour involved in handling it. Many retailers are moving that way: the march of online shopping has rendered cash-handling a competitive disadvantage.Andy_JS said:>My local Marks and Spencer cafe has just become cashless. Disappointing. You also have to use big screens to order things, like in McDonalds or Burger King.
Interestingly, the new pub opening near me is cashless.
The future is already here for many firms.
No, I bet there wasn't!
Thankfully after she'd gone everyone else in front of me wasn't dicking around with cash and then I could just pay contactless myself.
Speed matters. One of the first businesses I ever saw going cashless (a coffee shop in Holborn, several years ago) said this was the main reason for its decision. Its business resolved on selling as much coffee as possible in a rush window between 8am and 9am. If the queue was too long, its customers went elsewhere.
1 -
In contrast, reportedly, Clarkson serves up some decent beers despite being a devotee of delicately pink 'lady petrol'.Dopermean said:
Fridge full of fruit "cider" and Corona and a shelf of coloured gins as well, if the neck oil is off there's nothing worth drinking.Theuniondivvie said:
For a moment I was getting my head round Bibi having Carling on tap in his man cave.Anabobazina said:
Madri and Carling are utter shit. He has two pumps of Carling.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
https://x.com/DalrympleWill/status/1721163356051288412?lang=en
Anyway move over over Jeremy Clarkson. Is this the PB Tories' newly minted Greatest Living Englishman?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr4ly6p2wxvo.amp0 -
Independent Ireland also want tighter border controls to cut immigration and are particularly strong in rural areas and pro farmerLostPassword said:
Aontu and Independent Ireland doing well could well be the story of this election, though at the moment it's mostly notable for the very modest changes on nearly five years ago.HYUFD said:
They may but have been leaking to Aontu, who as the most anti immigration and anti abortion of the Irish parties shows even Ireland is not immune to the western swing to the populist rightLostPassword said:One thing to bear in mind with the Irish election is that Sinn Fein have been much more ambitious with their candidate selection this time. They have 71 candidates, while in 2020 they stood only 42, of which 37 were elected. If they had stood more candidates in 2020 it's generally thought that they would have had more TDs elected, so they could make quite a few gains even with roughly the same vote share split, which was 24.5% - 22.2% - 20.9% for SF - FF - FG last time.
0 -
Indeed. Not a single cask ale on offer. What has the Black Country come to? Maybe stick with a nice kipper tie, as they say in Oldbury.Dopermean said:
Fridge full of fruit "cider" and Corona and a shelf of coloured gins as well, if the neck oil is off there's nothing worth drinking.Theuniondivvie said:
For a moment I was getting my head round Bibi having Carling on tap in his man cave.Anabobazina said:
Madri and Carling are utter shit. He has two pumps of Carling.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
https://x.com/DalrympleWill/status/1721163356051288412?lang=en
Anyway move over over Jeremy Clarkson. Is this the PB Tories' newly minted Greatest Living Englishman?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr4ly6p2wxvo.amp0 -
At the greater expense of FF or FG?HYUFD said:
Independent Ireland also want tighter border controls to cut immigration and are particularly strong in rural areas and pro farmerLostPassword said:
Aontu and Independent Ireland doing well could well be the story of this election, though at the moment it's mostly notable for the very modest changes on nearly five years ago.HYUFD said:
They may but have been leaking to Aontu, who as the most anti immigration and anti abortion of the Irish parties shows even Ireland is not immune to the western swing to the populist rightLostPassword said:One thing to bear in mind with the Irish election is that Sinn Fein have been much more ambitious with their candidate selection this time. They have 71 candidates, while in 2020 they stood only 42, of which 37 were elected. If they had stood more candidates in 2020 it's generally thought that they would have had more TDs elected, so they could make quite a few gains even with roughly the same vote share split, which was 24.5% - 22.2% - 20.9% for SF - FF - FG last time.
0 -
Well yeah. That's why it's so expensive - there isn't anywhere else convenient, a bit like motorway petrol stations, but on steroids. The demand curve is very steep.BartholomewRoberts said:
"You only use them when desperate" - well where else do you charge?Eabhal said:
The other thing to bear in mind is it's service station pricing. You only use them when you are desperate, and in an EV you really have no other choice on a long journey. I doubt it's the cost of supply/infrastructure that sets the price.BartholomewRoberts said:
That's a good response, thank you.LostPassword said:
The high price for public chargers is likely a function of their relative rarity - people don't have much choice but to use the charger they find, and so the price charged is exorbitant. 65p per kWh is £650 per MWh, which compares to the average price of a MWh over the last year of £69.22. Obviously the cost of installation, maintenance, operation and a profit margin needs to be paid for, but a near tenfold markup on the wholesale price of electricity is hopefully only a temporary absurdity.BartholomewRoberts said:
The problem is even where the charging infrastructure is in place, the cost means hybrids are far cheaper to buy and operate than EVs.LostPassword said:
Five years is a long time to sort out charging infrastructure (though I think they should have started several years ago). And, of course, in fine years the bay majority of cars on the road will still be fossil fuel cars, it's only the new ones that would have to be at least hybrids (only fossil fuel only cars are phased out in 2030).solarflare said:Since we are talking Nissan etc. EVs, and the plan to only sell EVs from 2030 with a total end to petrol and diesel sales. How feasible/believable do people find this target?
Being honest I cannot see for the life of me where the infrastructure for that is coming in the next 5 years to make it work.
And living in a town where I've no drive for my own charger and the charging points are a couple at the train station and a couple at the Tesco in the next town, I'm wondering how on earth that gets scaled up in time to make it feasible, unless super-fast charging is the miracle solution and all the petrol stations miraculously turn into charging stations pretty much overnight.
Maybe I'm missing the obvious though.
But. There's no sign of the government getting their arse into gear to use these five years to put the charging infrastructure into place. It's incredibly frustrating. Everyone can see that it needs to be done. It's a clear example of a chicken/egg situation where the market is reluctant to install charging infrastructure before there are cars to use it, or for people to buy cars until there are the chargers to charge them with, and so a clear case for government intervention. And nothing appears to be happening.
I got my car, new, for many thousands less than the cheapest EVs on the market. Its a self-charging hybrid.
Refilling, I'm averaging £1 = 10 miles. £40 tank of unleaded (~30L) gets me over 400 miles.
However to get an EV not only costs many thousands more, but it costs more to refuel using public chargers. My local petrol station that I'm refilling at has fast chargers for EVs but it costs 65p per kWh. EVs I believe are get 3.5 miles per kWh so for 400 miles it would cost £74 to buy the kWh required for that distance, nearly twice the fuel cost per mile over what you get for unleaded - and of course the unleaded price is almost all tax.
Its not only necessary to make EV charging widespread, but affordable too.
If, at some point in the future, the markup is a factor of two, then that makes the cost of your 400 miles about £8 - probably quite a bit cheaper than petrol, even if the petrol was untaxed. And, of course, the EV charger in the future will likely have a battery powering it, a battery charged using very cheap overnight electricity, and so you'd expect there to be a lot of scope for competition to drive the cost of EV charging even lower.
I hope you're right though I'm more hopeful than expecting for such a dramatic reduction in markup. Hopefully it does happen, but bearing in mind the cost of real estate and infrastructure needs covering in the markup and not just the cost of the equipment then that can be a problem.
It was absolute chaos at Tebay EV charging last time I was there. They could've probably charged a lot more.
Please don't say "at home".0 -
KEEP CALMERHYUFD said:
Independent Ireland also want tighter border controls to cut immigration and are particularly strong in rural areas and pro farmerLostPassword said:
Aontu and Independent Ireland doing well could well be the story of this election, though at the moment it's mostly notable for the very modest changes on nearly five years ago.HYUFD said:
They may but have been leaking to Aontu, who as the most anti immigration and anti abortion of the Irish parties shows even Ireland is not immune to the western swing to the populist rightLostPassword said:One thing to bear in mind with the Irish election is that Sinn Fein have been much more ambitious with their candidate selection this time. They have 71 candidates, while in 2020 they stood only 42, of which 37 were elected. If they had stood more candidates in 2020 it's generally thought that they would have had more TDs elected, so they could make quite a few gains even with roughly the same vote share split, which was 24.5% - 22.2% - 20.9% for SF - FF - FG last time.
and
VOTE FARMER2 -
On the issue of cash, much to Anabobazina's chagrin, I am happy to predict that the UK will follow the progressive example of Norway and Sweden and reverse the trend away from cash, mandating that shops must accept it and advising all citizens to keep and use it.
I am sure Anabob will sadly never see the light but those with more forethought have already rejected the cashless future.1 -
I was in Oslo a few days ago and didn't see many people using cash, although when I tried it once in a convenience shop they did accept it. (Didn't know they'd just introduced a law saying cash must be accepted as Richard mentions below).Richard_Tyndall said:On the issue of cash, much to Anabobazina's chagrin, I am happy to predict that the UK will follow the progressive example of Norway and Sweden and reverse the trend away from cash, mandating that shops must accept it and advising all citizens to keep and use it.
I am sure Anabob will sadly never see the light but those with more forethought have already rejected the cashless future.
https://www.finextra.com/newsarticle/44934/norways-cashless-economy-drive-halted-by-new-cash-payment-rules1 -
Do they also mandate that online businesses must accept cash? Or is it a regulation they only burden bricks-and-mortar outlets with?Richard_Tyndall said:On the issue of cash, much to Anabobazina's chagrin, I am happy to predict that the UK will follow the progressive example of Norway and Sweden and reverse the trend away from cash, mandating that shops must accept it and advising all citizens to keep and use it.
I am sure Anabob will sadly never see the light but those with more forethought have already rejected the cashless future.0 -
Probably FGMoonRabbit said:
At the greater expense of FF or FG?HYUFD said:
Independent Ireland also want tighter border controls to cut immigration and are particularly strong in rural areas and pro farmerLostPassword said:
Aontu and Independent Ireland doing well could well be the story of this election, though at the moment it's mostly notable for the very modest changes on nearly five years ago.HYUFD said:
They may but have been leaking to Aontu, who as the most anti immigration and anti abortion of the Irish parties shows even Ireland is not immune to the western swing to the populist rightLostPassword said:One thing to bear in mind with the Irish election is that Sinn Fein have been much more ambitious with their candidate selection this time. They have 71 candidates, while in 2020 they stood only 42, of which 37 were elected. If they had stood more candidates in 2020 it's generally thought that they would have had more TDs elected, so they could make quite a few gains even with roughly the same vote share split, which was 24.5% - 22.2% - 20.9% for SF - FF - FG last time.
0 -
Read the article Andy links to. Or look for yourself. There are plenty more news articles about both Norway and Sweden reversing the drive towards a cashless society for many of the reasons you have always claimed don't matter. Clearly they have more foresight than you.Anabobazina said:
Do they also mandate that online businesses must accept cash? Or is it a regulation they only burden bricks-and-mortar outlets with?Richard_Tyndall said:On the issue of cash, much to Anabobazina's chagrin, I am happy to predict that the UK will follow the progressive example of Norway and Sweden and reverse the trend away from cash, mandating that shops must accept it and advising all citizens to keep and use it.
I am sure Anabob will sadly never see the light but those with more forethought have already rejected the cashless future.0 -
CNN just called two of the remaining House races - one each for Rep and Dem. So position now:
Reps 220, Dems 214
One race to call:
CA 13 - Dem leads by 234 votes (total votes cast 209,000)0 -
After arriving at Manchester Airport from Oslo, I ended up at Crewe train station, needed a coffee, and the platform cafe was only accepting cash because of a fault with their systems. Shows why cash can still be important.1
-
No I won’t support cash if I can.
It’s an archaic technology much as the cheque is.
Does anyone miss the cheque?
Why would anyone miss cash?0 -
I’ve read the piece. It’s very light on detail. I do doubt though whether they will extend this burden to online businesses, which already have an edge over physical shops. Unless they make it universal, it’s yet more bad news for the high street. Going cashless is (or was) a neat way for proper shops to reduce their overheads.Richard_Tyndall said:
Read the article Andy links to. Or look for yourself. There are plenty more news articles about both Norway and Sweden reversing the drive towards a cashless society for many of the reasons you have always claimed don't matter. Clearly they have more foresight than you.Anabobazina said:
Do they also mandate that online businesses must accept cash? Or is it a regulation they only burden bricks-and-mortar outlets with?Richard_Tyndall said:On the issue of cash, much to Anabobazina's chagrin, I am happy to predict that the UK will follow the progressive example of Norway and Sweden and reverse the trend away from cash, mandating that shops must accept it and advising all citizens to keep and use it.
I am sure Anabob will sadly never see the light but those with more forethought have already rejected the cashless future.0 -
Cash is as archaic as a physical phone line.0
-
Don't broadband connections use physical phone lines?BatteryCorrectHorse said:Cash is as archaic as a physical phone line.
0 -
Good point Rabbit. The Telegraph, a paper I took for decades (mainly because of their sports coverage) is now less reliable than Viz comic for accuracy of journalistic content.MoonRabbit said:
I think that is a bit of fiction from the Daily Telegraph. Surely the vibe the Labour Party is putting out about the Chagos deal now is that it is not set in stone, and they have no intention to bring it to Parliament untill after Trump is sworn in.Cookie said:SKS in a hurry to offload tge Chagos to the Mauritians/Chinese:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/27/starmer-attempting-to-rush-through-chagos-handover-before-t/
The truth could be a far more interesting story than what the Telegraph has gone with. Starmer government happy for Trump to ride to their rescue and “own the killing” of the Chagos deal, so they won’t have to do it themselves. Any hit from losing this deal will only last days or hours.
Based on half hearted vibes and feet dragging now coming out of Labour on Chagos deal, I’m 100% convinced it’s not going to happen.0 -
To where would all those scammers call if no one had landlines?BatteryCorrectHorse said:Cash is as archaic as a physical phone line.
0 -
They are being replaced with fibre. It’s basically the same as cash, going away slowly.Andy_JS said:
Don't broadband connections use physical phone lines?BatteryCorrectHorse said:Cash is as archaic as a physical phone line.
People in general don’t have a phone line for the phone. That’s the point I was making.
By the time I die cash won’t exist.1 -
These days the "landline" piggybacks off the broadband line. A volte face from dial up internet.Andy_JS said:
Don't broadband connections use physical phone lines?BatteryCorrectHorse said:Cash is as archaic as a physical phone line.
0 -
Sharon Stone blames ‘ignorant, uneducated’ Americans for Trump’s win
Adolescence is naive and ignorant and arrogant. And we are in our ignorant, arrogant adolescence. So, Americans who don’t travel, who 80 per cent don’t have a passport, who are uneducated, are in their extraordinary naivety.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2024/11/27/sharon-stone-blames-ignorant-uneducated-americans-trump-win/
Ignornant, arrogant.....80% not having passports hasn't been true for ages. It 50/50 now and more travel than ever before due to the low cost airlines (at least until the crazy inflation).
Calling half the country thickos seems a suboptimal approach.0 -
I can feel it changing even in my lifetime. Not just telegraph - who do cover racing very well - but all papers. What used to be on front, politics and current affairs, they used to try to be accurate, just spin it a bit - now they print things for effect, or playing politics, without even a nod to the truthful story.Mexicanpete said:
Good point Rabbit. The Telegraph, a paper I took for decades (mainly because of their sports coverage) is now less reliable than Viz comic for accuracy of journalistic content.MoonRabbit said:
I think that is a bit of fiction from the Daily Telegraph. Surely the vibe the Labour Party is putting out about the Chagos deal now is that it is not set in stone, and they have no intention to bring it to Parliament untill after Trump is sworn in.Cookie said:SKS in a hurry to offload tge Chagos to the Mauritians/Chinese:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/27/starmer-attempting-to-rush-through-chagos-handover-before-t/
The truth could be a far more interesting story than what the Telegraph has gone with. Starmer government happy for Trump to ride to their rescue and “own the killing” of the Chagos deal, so they won’t have to do it themselves. Any hit from losing this deal will only last days or hours.
Based on half hearted vibes and feet dragging now coming out of Labour on Chagos deal, I’m 100% convinced it’s not going to happen.
With Chagos, former head of MI6 hates it, Trumps incoming government hates it, new Mauritius PM doesn’t like it, the vibe now from Labour is happy to see it fold, on grounds others don’t like what they agreed with outgoing PM with nod from outgoing President. Absolute opposite from what Telegraph take is. Is it simply trying to set it up as huge humiliation and disaster for Starmer, who “fails to get through what he wanted?”
1 -
Its all about the clicks....Even the BBC do, lots more celeb nonsense e.g. Fans fume at missing Jason Donovan in Rocky Horror ....and it is a total non-story. Star doesn't do all performances, nooooooo, that never happens in showbiz, and his day off was displayed on websites and booking.MoonRabbit said:
I can feel it changing even in my lifetime. Not just telegraph - who do cover racing very well - but all papers. What used to be on front, politics and current affairs, they used to try to be accurate, just spin it a bit - now they print things for effect, or playing politics, without even a nod to the truthful story.Mexicanpete said:
Good point Rabbit. The Telegraph, a paper I took for decades (mainly because of their sports coverage) is now less reliable than Viz comic for accuracy of journalistic content.MoonRabbit said:
I think that is a bit of fiction from the Daily Telegraph. Surely the vibe the Labour Party is putting out about the Chagos deal now is that it is not set in stone, and they have no intention to bring it to Parliament untill after Trump is sworn in.Cookie said:SKS in a hurry to offload tge Chagos to the Mauritians/Chinese:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/27/starmer-attempting-to-rush-through-chagos-handover-before-t/
The truth could be a far more interesting story than what the Telegraph has gone with. Starmer government happy for Trump to ride to their rescue and “own the killing” of the Chagos deal, so they won’t have to do it themselves. Any hit from losing this deal will only last days or hours.
Based on half hearted vibes and feet dragging now coming out of Labour on Chagos deal, I’m 100% convinced it’s not going to happen.
With Chagos, former head of MI6 hates it, Trumps incoming government hates it, new Mauritius PM doesn’t like it, the vibe now from Labour is happy to see it fold, on grounds others don’t like what they agreed with outgoing PM with nod from outgoing President. Absolute opposite from what Telegraph take is. Is it simply trying to set it up as huge humiliation and disaster for Starmer, who “fails to get away with what he wanted?”0 -
Lib Dem leader Ed Davey in bid for Christmas No 1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy4q24ynp3o
Disappointed its not the theme tune from The Fall Guy1 -
Not a smart strategy for changing minds.FrancisUrquhart said:Sharon Stone blames ‘ignorant, uneducated’ Americans for Trump’s win
Adolescence is naive and ignorant and arrogant. And we are in our ignorant, arrogant adolescence. So, Americans who don’t travel, who 80 per cent don’t have a passport, who are uneducated, are in their extraordinary naivety.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2024/11/27/sharon-stone-blames-ignorant-uneducated-americans-trump-win/
Ignornant, arrogant.....80% not having passports hasn't been true for ages. It 50/50 now and more travel than ever before due to the low cost airlines (at least until the crazy inflation).
Calling half the country thickos seems a suboptimal approach.0 -
Czech billionaire set to clinch deal to buy Royal Mail
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9j3revppqo
What the angle here? The real estate Royal Mail own?0 -
Good news. Let's hope they find it this time.
"Fresh search for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 to start within weeks off the coast of Western Australia more than a decade after the tragedy"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14061169/new-search-malaysia-airlines-flight-MH370.html0 -
You are absolutely right Urq, what used to be solid news websites have gone all clickbait.FrancisUrquhart said:
Its all about the clicks....Even the BBC do, lots more celeb nonsense e.g. Fans fume at missing Jason Donovan in Rocky Horror ....and it is a total non-story. Star doesn't do all performances, nooooooo, that never happens in showbiz, and his day off was displayed on websites and booking.MoonRabbit said:
I can feel it changing even in my lifetime. Not just telegraph - who do cover racing very well - but all papers. What used to be on front, politics and current affairs, they used to try to be accurate, just spin it a bit - now they print things for effect, or playing politics, without even a nod to the truthful story.Mexicanpete said:
Good point Rabbit. The Telegraph, a paper I took for decades (mainly because of their sports coverage) is now less reliable than Viz comic for accuracy of journalistic content.MoonRabbit said:
I think that is a bit of fiction from the Daily Telegraph. Surely the vibe the Labour Party is putting out about the Chagos deal now is that it is not set in stone, and they have no intention to bring it to Parliament untill after Trump is sworn in.Cookie said:SKS in a hurry to offload tge Chagos to the Mauritians/Chinese:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/27/starmer-attempting-to-rush-through-chagos-handover-before-t/
The truth could be a far more interesting story than what the Telegraph has gone with. Starmer government happy for Trump to ride to their rescue and “own the killing” of the Chagos deal, so they won’t have to do it themselves. Any hit from losing this deal will only last days or hours.
Based on half hearted vibes and feet dragging now coming out of Labour on Chagos deal, I’m 100% convinced it’s not going to happen.
With Chagos, former head of MI6 hates it, Trumps incoming government hates it, new Mauritius PM doesn’t like it, the vibe now from Labour is happy to see it fold, on grounds others don’t like what they agreed with outgoing PM with nod from outgoing President. Absolute opposite from what Telegraph take is. Is it simply trying to set it up as huge humiliation and disaster for Starmer, who “fails to get away with what he wanted?”
The MailOnline is worst/way ahead of the game with its a very very odd universe. As you say, it’s all set up that it’s important to care about the “Celebrity Bake Off Soggy Bottom Shame” story. And the story about someone we have never heard of and inexplicably have 2 forenames and appearance of fortune to have survived so much cosmetic modification, having coffee with a friend without engagement ring on shocker. let’s invent a name - Mystery as Mercedeh Zoe spotted in Starbucks without engagement ring.
Like we care? Like it even makes any sense? 🤷♀️0 -
Maybe people vote for idiots when they feel there are too many "smart arses" around, as a sort of compensation.0
-
-
Our milkman only accepted cheques until last year. To be fair, they are good for leaving outside your house inside a sandwich bag stuffed into an empty milk bottle. No one else can use them other than the recipient.BatteryCorrectHorse said:No I won’t support cash if I can.
It’s an archaic technology much as the cheque is.
Does anyone miss the cheque?
Why would anyone miss cash?
But he did then discover internet banking.
0 -
Ofcom's annual Online Nation report provides more evidence for Elon that Britain is a communist hellhole as TwiX falls in the social media chart.
Top 10- YouTube
- Facebook
- Instagram
- TikTok
- Reddit
- TwiX
- LinkedIn
- Quora
- Pinterest
- Snapchat
0 - YouTube
-
Re Netanyahu arrest. It would not be unprecedented. We arrested Pinochet on a Spanish (?) warrant.1
-
Lamp post (and street-side) chargers are starting to appear round here but not yet in any great numbers. It is all right saying they are available for all-night charging but that is not really the case if someone else got there first. No-one will set their alarm for 2am so they can move the car once the battery is full; that charger will be blocked for the whole night. Even that assumes the first car is electric rather than just looking for a handy place to park.MattW said:
As I understand the way this works (Elec Eng degree), streetlights used to have bulbs which would be High Pressure Sodium (the orange ones), or some form of incandescent. These would need maybe 200W of power, which would reduce by 60-80% when they were changed to LED (hence revenue savings).Malmesbury said:
Street lamps in the U.K. were wired to 20 or 32 amps. Which does make you wonder if plugging electric ovens into a street lamp was a thing.Foxy said:
Cars only need charging every couple of weeks. They aren't being charged every night at every lamp post.eek said:
You need a lot of power to provide 7kw of power to a street lamp compared to the 100w an LED light requires nowadays. Especially when you need to provide power to 2 cars at every lightJohnLilburne said:
I was in the Netherlands in October, they have streetside chargers.solarflare said:Since we are talking Nissan etc. EVs, and the plan to only sell EVs from 2030 with a total end to petrol and diesel sales. How feasible/believable do people find this target?
Being honest I cannot see for the life of me where the infrastructure for that is coming in the next 5 years to make it work.
And living in a town where I've no drive for my own charger and the charging points are a couple at the train station and a couple at the Tesco in the next town, I'm wondering how on earth that gets scaled up in time to make it feasible, unless super-fast charging is the miracle solution and all the petrol stations miraculously turn into charging stations pretty much overnight.
Maybe I'm missing the obvious though.
The supply and cabling will need some work - which is being done on a rolling basis, in many places.
There would be a high power circuit along the street supplying a lot of lamps (use ~30 as an illustrative number, so 200W each = 6kW power perhaps from a 7kW circuit to give headroom). Then each streetlamp would have smaller wires inside the lamp standard. They would be in parallel so when one goes pop it does not kill all 30 streetlamps.
When they drop to 50-60W required by the LED, that leaves 60-80% of the street cable capacity spare as the streetlamps are a smaller load now, or ~100-140W per streetlamp.
So that leaves capacity to install your 4kW charger one every 25 or 30 or however many streetlamps, or a 2.5kW charger more often, or whatever, wired as a new parallel load from the street cable.
It won't support a charger every streetlamp, but it may give a couple every street - which is enough to make a start on the infra, and is useful for top up charging, or if you use it for an afternoon or overnight once a week.
There could be other factors, such as the supply might be 3-phase (I think 4 or 6 wires inside the street cable), so that even if something goes pop in the street it would only take out 1/3 of lights not the whole lot.
Newer estates etc would have a somewhat different design of electricity infrastructure, as required.
That's my understanding. HTH.0 -
I need to pull you up on that. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one poster who has said Netanyahu is a great guy, let alone PB Tories. Many posters were saying he was a shit before October 6th.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
(Snip)1 -
On a potential Russian collapse:
We need to remember the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, for ten years to 1989. In those ten grinding years, they suffered fifteen thousand killed, and fifty thousand injured. The withdrawal was, in part, powered by the mothers and wives of the soldiers.
We have seen far higher Russian casualties in Ukraine, yet the population are not revolting. Why?
It cannot just be media control; the Soviet press and media were not exactly free. IMV it may well be that the great Russian public remember what happened after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Before, Russia was a great power as dominant leader of the USSR. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was more a consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union than a cause, but politically it showed the other Soviet republics that the Soviet Union was a hollow shell and was beatable. So the Soviet Union split, and Russia was plunged into a decade of economic and social chaos. This ended after a strong and stable leader took over the reins.
This is all within living memory. I posit (perhaps incorrectly...) that many Russian citizens equate defeat in Afghanistan with a diminishment of their country, and are afraid that the same thing will happen with a defeat in Ukraine. And they trust that their leader will pick them out of the morass, as he did twenty years ago. It is safer to continue on, with the prospect of a larger (territorially...) Russia and increased Russian worldwide influence, than it is to stop the war, with the chaos that could cause. They see the potential rewards of success as greater than the risks of failure. The current pain is only temporary.
The connection is not that strong; the Afghanistan war was relatively cheap (monetarily) for Russia, and the Soviet Union's political and fiscal problems were legion years before they even invaded Afghanistan. The withdrawal might be seen as an effect of the Soviet Union's problems, rather than a cause. But the Russian people might not remember it that way,0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Opponents of actual cash are proponents, unwittingly (I hope), of making us alarmingly vulnerable to unfortunate systems failures and errors, and, worse, deliberate hacking attempts by foreign actors.2 -
Thankfully they went on to collapse nearly as fast as the rouble. 319/8 at the close of play.Andy_JS said:0 -
I specifically suggested "some" and I'm not going to embarrass the guilty, although there is a particular mindset here which would have "right wing good" everything else very bad. @DecrepiterJohnL mentioned Pinochet earlier. There we have an example of that mindset. Although rounding up left wingers and moderates and taking them to a convenient stadium might find some merits of itself here anyway.JosiasJessop said:
I need to pull you up on that. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one poster who has said Netanyahu is a great guy, let alone PB Tories. Many posters were saying he was a shit before October 6th.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
(Snip)
Surely tacit support for Netanyahu on here is a given when several posters have justified the flattening of Gaza, the West Bank and South and Central Beirut as a proportionate reaction to October 7?0 -
This talk of cheques is making me feel nostalgic. I haven’t used and probably not even seen a cheque since 2007 when I left for Switzerland. I was with a friend the other Friday and he was sorting out some payments for his daughter’s school trip and various other school things on a weird app the school used and we laughed that it was so much easier in a way when you could give a child or be given a cheque to take into school.biggles said:
Our milkman only accepted cheques until last year. To be fair, they are good for leaving outside your house inside a sandwich bag stuffed into an empty milk bottle. No one else can use them other than the recipient.BatteryCorrectHorse said:No I won’t support cash if I can.
It’s an archaic technology much as the cheque is.
Does anyone miss the cheque?
Why would anyone miss cash?
But he did then discover internet banking.
There was something a lot more satisfying about writing out a big fat cheque for a car or something than typing numbers into your phone or computer.0 -
Mr. Anabob “How much for 2 fish suppers?” Chip shop staff “£25 or £20 for cash.”.Mr Anabob “Here’s my card. It’s worth £5 for the convenience of not using cash”.Fairliered said:
Got me a small discount on my takeout this eveningPulpstar said:
What's the point of cash?MarqueeMark said:
It can be actual dimness.Anabobazina said:
Why?algarkirk said:
Your capacity to misunderstand must be deliberate. It can't be actual dimness. It is not suggested that cash is appropriate to all transactions, just that it should be an option for many day to day transactions.Anabobazina said:
I would like to see you try to exercise such freedom of choice when a mate sends you a payment link for his Movember charity drive...Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point is freedom of choiceAnabobazina said:
Yes but what is the point of doing all of these things, given that all of them can be done more quickly and easily, and at less risk to both buyer and vendor, than using cash? There is literally no point to any of it – it's just a complete waste of time and materials to do exactly the same thing you could do with BACs/contactless/ApplePay.algarkirk said:
Yes, Really. And small change can be got rid of in a multitude of ways including charity boxes/tins and in a slot near the door in any church, or at community coffee mornings etc. As to getting rid of £200 cash in minutes, stock up at Lidl on a quiet day (my preferred version of Fortnum and Mason) pop to the butcher, go to the petrol station, buy some fish and chips. 83p change to their charity box for the local hospice. Done and fun. And conversation with old friends as you do it will put you back in you are pressed for time.Anabobazina said:
Really? Without receiving even more pointless "change" – or being that guy who asks whether he can pay some in cash and the rest with card?algarkirk said:
Inability to dispose of cash - say any sum under a couple of hundred pounds - within a reasonably short time displays an extraordinary lack of imagination. It can be done in minutes or even seconds by an expert. Can this really only be true in the small town rural north of England?Anabobazina said:
I have to trudge to the bank if any relatives insist on posting (yes posting!) cash to my son for a gift. He cannot use it to buy the things he buys (online games for his PS5, electronics from online retailers), so it is just an entirely pointless chore that could have been avoided had they just transferred the money – which takes 60 seconds.FrancisUrquhart said:
Can't even give it to my friends kids, they all have apple pay on their phone / watched attached to accounts. They want to be cool and tap it like the adults.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My grandchildren's Saturday morning 'Grandma's helpers' would resolve that problemFrancisUrquhart said:
I have had £50 in cash in my wallet for 6 months... can't get rid of it.Anabobazina said:.
The pub that has just opened near me is cashless. Endgame for the pointless tokens and shards.FrancisUrquhart said:cash, will soon be obsolete...TRIGGER WARNING....
Which planet are you from by the way?
I mean a couple of mates are doing Movember – I suppose I could have posted them some notes and change and had them spend it in Lidl before putting the digital money in their charity fund on my behalf, then somehow claiming the GiftAid via telegraph to the Taxman.
But what would be the point?
That sort of makes one of Anabob's points for him. A recorded for posterity transaction is auditable and very good for the exchequer. Cash hobbles and the grey economy are less easy to manage without notes and coins.1 -
As I say, I cannot remember anyone saying "Netanyahu is a great guy". That's different from saying that Israel is in a terrible position due to Palestinian actions, and had to do something. Although most of the 'PB Tories' on here seem to say what they did was wrong/too much, and that Netanyahu is a shit.Mexicanpete said:
I specifically suggested "some" and I'm not going to embarrass the guilty, although there is a particular mindset here which would have "right wing good" everything else very bad. @DecrepiterJohnL mentioned Pinochet earlier. There we have an example of that mindset. Although rounding up left wingers and moderates and taking them to a convenient stadium might find some merits of itself here anyway.JosiasJessop said:
I need to pull you up on that. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one poster who has said Netanyahu is a great guy, let alone PB Tories. Many posters were saying he was a shit before October 6th.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
(Snip)
Surely tacit support for Netanyahu on here is a given when several posters have justified the flattening of Gaza, the West Bank and South and Central Beirut as a proportionate reaction to October 7?
As for your comment: I'd argue that's also the case for leftists, on steroids. We even have idiots who praise Stalin, Lenin, and the Soviet Union. And as for tankies...0 -
Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"1 -
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.1 -
Fucksake, getting light at 7.03am1
-
That sort of makes one of Anabob's points for him. A recorded for posterity transaction is auditable and very good for the exchequer. Cash hobbles and the grey economy are less easy to manage without notes and coins.Mexicanpete said:
Mr. Anabob “How much for 2 fish suppers?” Chip shop staff “£25 or £20 for cash.”.Mr Anabob “Here’s my card. It’s worth £5 for the convenience of not using cash”.Fairliered said:
Got me a small discount on my takeout this eveningPulpstar said:
What's the point of cash?MarqueeMark said:
It can be actual dimness.Anabobazina said:
Why?algarkirk said:
Your capacity to misunderstand must be deliberate. It can't be actual dimness. It is not suggested that cash is appropriate to all transactions, just that it should be an option for many day to day transactions.Anabobazina said:
I would like to see you try to exercise such freedom of choice when a mate sends you a payment link for his Movember charity drive...Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point is freedom of choiceAnabobazina said:
Yes but what is the point of doing all of these things, given that all of them can be done more quickly and easily, and at less risk to both buyer and vendor, than using cash? There is literally no point to any of it – it's just a complete waste of time and materials to do exactly the same thing you could do with BACs/contactless/ApplePay.algarkirk said:
Yes, Really. And small change can be got rid of in a multitude of ways including charity boxes/tins and in a slot near the door in any church, or at community coffee mornings etc. As to getting rid of £200 cash in minutes, stock up at Lidl on a quiet day (my preferred version of Fortnum and Mason) pop to the butcher, go to the petrol station, buy some fish and chips. 83p change to their charity box for the local hospice. Done and fun. And conversation with old friends as you do it will put you back in you are pressed for time.Anabobazina said:
Really? Without receiving even more pointless "change" – or being that guy who asks whether he can pay some in cash and the rest with card?algarkirk said:
Inability to dispose of cash - say any sum under a couple of hundred pounds - within a reasonably short time displays an extraordinary lack of imagination. It can be done in minutes or even seconds by an expert. Can this really only be true in the small town rural north of England?Anabobazina said:
I have to trudge to the bank if any relatives insist on posting (yes posting!) cash to my son for a gift. He cannot use it to buy the things he buys (online games for his PS5, electronics from online retailers), so it is just an entirely pointless chore that could have been avoided had they just transferred the money – which takes 60 seconds.FrancisUrquhart said:
Can't even give it to my friends kids, they all have apple pay on their phone / watched attached to accounts. They want to be cool and tap it like the adults.Big_G_NorthWales said:
My grandchildren's Saturday morning 'Grandma's helpers' would resolve that problemFrancisUrquhart said:
I have had £50 in cash in my wallet for 6 months... can't get rid of it.Anabobazina said:.
The pub that has just opened near me is cashless. Endgame for the pointless tokens and shards.FrancisUrquhart said:cash, will soon be obsolete...TRIGGER WARNING....
Which planet are you from by the way?
I mean a couple of mates are doing Movember – I suppose I could have posted them some notes and change and had them spend it in Lidl before putting the digital money in their charity fund on my behalf, then somehow claiming the GiftAid via telegraph to the Taxman.
But what would be the point?
Indeed it does. I have many more points on this topic too, which I am happy to share with my friends here on PB. 😃0 -
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
2 -
Just imagine for a moment that there might be better ways of fostering financial security than demanding a reluctant populace walks around with tokens and shards in its pocket/handbag.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Opponents of actual cash are proponents, unwittingly (I hope), of making us alarmingly vulnerable to unfortunate systems failures and errors, and, worse, deliberate hacking attempts by foreign actors.0 -
(Use the reply button FFS)Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair?0 -
Mr. Anabobazina, stop complaining about the lack of a reply button, 'FFS'.
"(Use the reply button FFS)
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair? "
My mother used to work in a school. In the early days when they first started collecting information about the race of children the school was reassured that data would never be used for anything really. Later, the school got criticised for not having 'enough' non-white children.
If there's ever no actual money and it's all virtual, the data collected will put together a comprehensive profile of people. Spending habits and movements. It's also perfect for a 0.5% transaction tax, which cannot be evaded in any way. If the information is viewed by someone it should not be, that can be used to see where someone is, what they're spending, etc.
I have zero faith in the UK political class and state sector not to be careless, authoritarian, and needlessly balloon the number of people with access to such information.
And that's without considering how monumentally dangerous and stupid it would be to create a situation in which a systems failure or nefarious acts could leave people unable to pay bills or buy food.4 -
Have you read about Synapse?BartholomewRoberts said:
I don't get your Luddite obsession with cash.Andy_JS said:Support cash if you can.
The sooner cash is eliminated the better. Filthy, dangerous, horrid thing.
Your reliance on technology for your world wealth is short sighted to say the least
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/tax-insights-and-commentary/matt-levines-money-stuff-synapse-still-cant-find-its-money?context=search&index=0
The summary:
People thought that they had money in a bank
There is money in the bank
Synapse was the company keeping the record of who owned what money
Synapse went pop
Now the banks don’t know whose money is whose1 -
Those who normally hate regulation and red tape on business seem very keen to regulate and impose red tape on them when it suits. British business has never been required to accept cash in exchange for goods or services.1
-
Yesterday highlighted two of the challenges Badenoch faces. One is that internet memes don't, by themselves, make a political leader. Referencing The Petition was just silly.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
The other is that she was a moderately senior figure in the 2019-24 governments. The record of that government is going to stick to her like a piece of discarded chewing gum.0 -
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.2 -
"Palestinian actions"? Are you suggesting Hamas were acting on behalf of the women and children of Gaza? I would suggest they were operating on behalf of their own sick agenda, nothing more, nothing less.JosiasJessop said:
As I say, I cannot remember anyone saying "Netanyahu is a great guy". That's different from saying that Israel is in a terrible position due to Palestinian actions, and had to do something. Although most of the 'PB Tories' on here seem to say what they did was wrong/too much, and that Netanyahu is a shit.Mexicanpete said:
I specifically suggested "some" and I'm not going to embarrass the guilty, although there is a particular mindset here which would have "right wing good" everything else very bad. @DecrepiterJohnL mentioned Pinochet earlier. There we have an example of that mindset. Although rounding up left wingers and moderates and taking them to a convenient stadium might find some merits of itself here anyway.JosiasJessop said:
I need to pull you up on that. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one poster who has said Netanyahu is a great guy, let alone PB Tories. Many posters were saying he was a shit before October 6th.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
(Snip)
Surely tacit support for Netanyahu on here is a given when several posters have justified the flattening of Gaza, the West Bank and South and Central Beirut as a proportionate reaction to October 7?
As for your comment: I'd argue that's also the case for leftists, on steroids. We even have idiots who praise Stalin, Lenin, and the Soviet Union. And as for tankies...0 -
That's an interesting idea.JosiasJessop said:On a potential Russian collapse:
We need to remember the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, for ten years to 1989. In those ten grinding years, they suffered fifteen thousand killed, and fifty thousand injured. The withdrawal was, in part, powered by the mothers and wives of the soldiers.
We have seen far higher Russian casualties in Ukraine, yet the population are not revolting. Why?
It cannot just be media control; the Soviet press and media were not exactly free. IMV it may well be that the great Russian public remember what happened after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Before, Russia was a great power as dominant leader of the USSR. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was more a consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union than a cause, but politically it showed the other Soviet republics that the Soviet Union was a hollow shell and was beatable. So the Soviet Union split, and Russia was plunged into a decade of economic and social chaos. This ended after a strong and stable leader took over the reins.
This is all within living memory. I posit (perhaps incorrectly...) that many Russian citizens equate defeat in Afghanistan with a diminishment of their country, and are afraid that the same thing will happen with a defeat in Ukraine. And they trust that their leader will pick them out of the morass, as he did twenty years ago. It is safer to continue on, with the prospect of a larger (territorially...) Russia and increased Russian worldwide influence, than it is to stop the war, with the chaos that could cause. They see the potential rewards of success as greater than the risks of failure. The current pain is only temporary.
The connection is not that strong; the Afghanistan war was relatively cheap (monetarily) for Russia, and the Soviet Union's political and fiscal problems were legion years before they even invaded Afghanistan. The withdrawal might be seen as an effect of the Soviet Union's problems, rather than a cause. But the Russian people might not remember it that way,
One other factor might be time. As well as the number of deaths it takes time for opinions to change and for people to gain the confidence to protest. So it took many years for the movement of mothers and wives to grow.
We know Putin has done a lot to shield core Russia from the war. Were there perhaps more casualties of soldiers from Moscow during Afghanistan? That could be an important difference.
And post-Soviet Russia is perhaps a bit less shy about compensating bereaved families financially. Had the USSR provided cars and a stack of roubles to grieving mothers, would the anti-war protest movement gained as much traction?1 -
Yes, I miss the chequeBatteryCorrectHorse said:No I won’t support cash if I can.
It’s an archaic technology much as the cheque is.
Does anyone miss the cheque?
Why would anyone miss cash?
When I feel that a business has behaved poorly I insist on paying with a check
It is a wonderfully British form of passive aggression and I’d hate to lose that option
2 -
Is there any reason she'll be any better at the really hard stuff?DavidL said:
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.1 -
Thank you Leon.Casino_Royale said:Fucksake, getting light at 7.03am
0 -
Mr. Gate, that's correct, before digital money existed and payment apps, nobody legislated to make real money something that had to be expected.
It should be, at least for vital goods and services.
Being able to pay with money is not some bizarre, arcane desire. It's the normal way of doing things.
A banking system failing will not make your fiver disappear. A twenty pound note will still function regardless of the actions of foreign hackers.4 -
Good morningMexicanpete said:
"Palestinian actions"? Are you suggesting Hamas were acting on behalf of the women and children of Gaza? I would suggest they were operating on behalf of their own sick agenda, nothing more, nothing less.JosiasJessop said:
As I say, I cannot remember anyone saying "Netanyahu is a great guy". That's different from saying that Israel is in a terrible position due to Palestinian actions, and had to do something. Although most of the 'PB Tories' on here seem to say what they did was wrong/too much, and that Netanyahu is a shit.Mexicanpete said:
I specifically suggested "some" and I'm not going to embarrass the guilty, although there is a particular mindset here which would have "right wing good" everything else very bad. @DecrepiterJohnL mentioned Pinochet earlier. There we have an example of that mindset. Although rounding up left wingers and moderates and taking them to a convenient stadium might find some merits of itself here anyway.JosiasJessop said:
I need to pull you up on that. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one poster who has said Netanyahu is a great guy, let alone PB Tories. Many posters were saying he was a shit before October 6th.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
(Snip)
Surely tacit support for Netanyahu on here is a given when several posters have justified the flattening of Gaza, the West Bank and South and Central Beirut as a proportionate reaction to October 7?
As for your comment: I'd argue that's also the case for leftists, on steroids. We even have idiots who praise Stalin, Lenin, and the Soviet Union. And as for tankies...
I have never said Netanyahu is a great guy and shame on you for suggesting it
He and Hamas are both heinous but I posed a fair question which you twisted and implied something that I utterly reject
Maybe address the question
What do you think if Netanyahu was arrested in the UK not least as only yesterday France rejected the idea0 -
Can we say the Czech’s in the post?FrancisUrquhart said:Czech billionaire set to clinch deal to buy Royal Mail
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9j3revppqo
What the angle here? The real estate Royal Mail own?
I think he owns a logistics company in Eastern Europe, so a shift to parcel delivery0 -
I am still hoping to buy a house. I have been told by my mortgage broker not to use my card to make any purchases at an off licence, or in the pub, because the bank wants six months of bank statements and if they see anything like that I will get flagged as a potential alcoholic, and alcoholics are one of the groups more likely to default on a mortgage.Anabobazina said:
(Use the reply button FFS)Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair?
Similarly there are proposals for the betting companies to be told to share information about how much their customers bet, on the basis of identifying "problem gamblers", and restricting their gambling.
These are two examples. When the data is there, it will be used.4 -
Possibly not, her efforts in respect of the Post Office do not inspire confidence. But that is the priority. The Tories need a group of thinkers that she can engage with just like Thatcher and Cameron had. No one person has the answers to all these questions, let alone having the time to develop the detail of what is required.Chris said:
Is there any reason she'll be any better at the really hard stuff?DavidL said:
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.1 -
I think the reason that she is proving so piss-poor at PMQs is precisely because she hasn't got a plan on the things in her second paragraph, or at least not one that her party would back. I suspect that she would slash welfare and scrap the featherbedding of pensioners, but knows that would kill off the Tory grey vote.DavidL said:
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.0 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
I don’t know about Afghanistan but one of the features of the Ukrainian invasion is who the Russian soldiers are.JosiasJessop said:On a potential Russian collapse:
We need to remember the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, for ten years to 1989. In those ten grinding years, they suffered fifteen thousand killed, and fifty thousand injured. The withdrawal was, in part, powered by the mothers and wives of the soldiers.
We have seen far higher Russian casualties in Ukraine, yet the population are not revolting. Why?
It cannot just be media control; the Soviet press and media were not exactly free. IMV it may well be that the great Russian public remember what happened after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Before, Russia was a great power as dominant leader of the USSR. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was more a consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union than a cause, but politically it showed the other Soviet republics that the Soviet Union was a hollow shell and was beatable. So the Soviet Union split, and Russia was plunged into a decade of economic and social chaos. This ended after a strong and stable leader took over the reins.
This is all within living memory. I posit (perhaps incorrectly...) that many Russian citizens equate defeat in Afghanistan with a diminishment of their country, and are afraid that the same thing will happen with a defeat in Ukraine. And they trust that their leader will pick them out of the morass, as he did twenty years ago. It is safer to continue on, with the prospect of a larger (territorially...) Russia and increased Russian worldwide influence, than it is to stop the war, with the chaos that could cause. They see the potential rewards of success as greater than the risks of failure. The current pain is only temporary.
The connection is not that strong; the Afghanistan war was relatively cheap (monetarily) for Russia, and the Soviet Union's political and fiscal problems were legion years before they even invaded Afghanistan. The withdrawal might be seen as an effect of the Soviet Union's problems, rather than a cause. But the Russian people might not remember it that way,
It’s minorities and mercenaries who are doing the dying. Not fine upstanding young Muscovites. That may change the ability to the wives and mothers to apply political pressure.
(Plus the babushkas are one of Putin’s strongest support bases, presumably because of the memory of better times as you suggest)2 -
I would be fine with him being arrested and tried at the ICC.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Good morningMexicanpete said:
"Palestinian actions"? Are you suggesting Hamas were acting on behalf of the women and children of Gaza? I would suggest they were operating on behalf of their own sick agenda, nothing more, nothing less.JosiasJessop said:
As I say, I cannot remember anyone saying "Netanyahu is a great guy". That's different from saying that Israel is in a terrible position due to Palestinian actions, and had to do something. Although most of the 'PB Tories' on here seem to say what they did was wrong/too much, and that Netanyahu is a shit.Mexicanpete said:
I specifically suggested "some" and I'm not going to embarrass the guilty, although there is a particular mindset here which would have "right wing good" everything else very bad. @DecrepiterJohnL mentioned Pinochet earlier. There we have an example of that mindset. Although rounding up left wingers and moderates and taking them to a convenient stadium might find some merits of itself here anyway.JosiasJessop said:
I need to pull you up on that. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one poster who has said Netanyahu is a great guy, let alone PB Tories. Many posters were saying he was a shit before October 6th.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
(Snip)
Surely tacit support for Netanyahu on here is a given when several posters have justified the flattening of Gaza, the West Bank and South and Central Beirut as a proportionate reaction to October 7?
As for your comment: I'd argue that's also the case for leftists, on steroids. We even have idiots who praise Stalin, Lenin, and the Soviet Union. And as for tankies...
I have never said Netanyahu is a great guy and shame on you for suggesting it
He and Hamas are both heinous but I posed a fair question which you twisted and implied something that I utterly reject
Maybe address the question
What do you think if Netanyahu was arrested in the UK not least as only yesterday France rejected the idea
Let him defend his war crimes there.1 -
Its early days and there is a hell of a lot of work to do. The last Conservative government completely lost its way because it didn't have a clear vision of what it was trying to achieve. The result was a program of completely daft ideas (like Rwanda) and very few policies that were actually relevant to people. So far Labour in government are proving much the same. Good government is hard work. Osborne was the last one to really apply himself to it.Foxy said:
I think the reason that she is proving so piss-poor at PMQs is precisely because she hasn't got a plan on the things in her second paragraph, or at least not one that her party would back. I suspect that she would slash welfare and scrap the featherbedding of pensioners, but knows that would kill off the Tory grey vote.DavidL said:
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.0 -
Thank you Leon.Casino_Royale said:Fucksake, getting light at 7.03am
All your recorded spending can be used not only by HMRC but your card use can be used by law enforcement to retrace your whereabouts in the event of substantiating criminality. Although if the PDQ machine doesn't convict you the CCTV at the gas station when paying by cash can.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"0 -
From memory, a quarter of 'Russian' casualties in Afghanistan were Ukrainian. Which is an interesting little factoid.LostPassword said:
That's an interesting idea.JosiasJessop said:On a potential Russian collapse:
We need to remember the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, for ten years to 1989. In those ten grinding years, they suffered fifteen thousand killed, and fifty thousand injured. The withdrawal was, in part, powered by the mothers and wives of the soldiers.
We have seen far higher Russian casualties in Ukraine, yet the population are not revolting. Why?
It cannot just be media control; the Soviet press and media were not exactly free. IMV it may well be that the great Russian public remember what happened after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Before, Russia was a great power as dominant leader of the USSR. The withdrawal from Afghanistan was more a consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union than a cause, but politically it showed the other Soviet republics that the Soviet Union was a hollow shell and was beatable. So the Soviet Union split, and Russia was plunged into a decade of economic and social chaos. This ended after a strong and stable leader took over the reins.
This is all within living memory. I posit (perhaps incorrectly...) that many Russian citizens equate defeat in Afghanistan with a diminishment of their country, and are afraid that the same thing will happen with a defeat in Ukraine. And they trust that their leader will pick them out of the morass, as he did twenty years ago. It is safer to continue on, with the prospect of a larger (territorially...) Russia and increased Russian worldwide influence, than it is to stop the war, with the chaos that could cause. They see the potential rewards of success as greater than the risks of failure. The current pain is only temporary.
The connection is not that strong; the Afghanistan war was relatively cheap (monetarily) for Russia, and the Soviet Union's political and fiscal problems were legion years before they even invaded Afghanistan. The withdrawal might be seen as an effect of the Soviet Union's problems, rather than a cause. But the Russian people might not remember it that way,
One other factor might be time. As well as the number of deaths it takes time for opinions to change and for people to gain the confidence to protest. So it took many years for the movement of mothers and wives to grow.
We know Putin has done a lot to shield core Russia from the war. Were there perhaps more casualties of soldiers from Moscow during Afghanistan? That could be an important difference.
And post-Soviet Russia is perhaps a bit less shy about compensating bereaved families financially. Had the USSR provided cars and a stack of roubles to grieving mothers, would the anti-war protest movement gained as much traction?2 -
As I said yesterday Kemi is young and has a lot to learn but she is different and has plenty of time to grow into her role and change the perception of the public about the partyDavidL said:
Possibly not, her efforts in respect of the Post Office do not inspire confidence. But that is the priority. The Tories need a group of thinkers that she can engage with just like Thatcher and Cameron had. No one person has the answers to all these questions, let alone having the time to develop the detail of what is required.Chris said:
Is there any reason she'll be any better at the really hard stuff?DavidL said:
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.
The pile on her yesterday came from posters who wouldn't vote for her anyway and it's a bit rich when their party languishes with a 19% approval rating and Reeves has delivered an anti growth budget widely attacked by those who actually create the wealth to pay for her public sector largesse1 -
There is no lack of reply button, it’s there. You just inexplicably fail to use it… which means other posters have to trawl back up the thread to ascertain what you are referring to!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Anabobazina, stop complaining about the lack of a reply button, 'FFS'.
"(Use the reply button FFS)
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair? "
My mother used to work in a school. In the early days when they first started collecting information about the race of children the school was reassured that data would never be used for anything really. Later, the school got criticised for not having 'enough' non-white children.
If there's ever no actual money and it's all virtual, the data collected will put together a comprehensive profile of people. Spending habits and movements. It's also perfect for a 0.5% transaction tax, which cannot be evaded in any way. If the information is viewed by someone it should not be, that can be used to see where someone is, what they're spending, etc.
I have zero faith in the UK political class and state sector not to be careless, authoritarian, and needlessly balloon the number of people with access to such information.
And that's without considering how monumentally dangerous and stupid it would be to create a situation in which a systems failure or nefarious acts could leave people unable to pay bills or buy food.1 -
You've somewhat moved the discussion away from what you originally said.Mexicanpete said:
"Palestinian actions"? Are you suggesting Hamas were acting on behalf of the women and children of Gaza? I would suggest they were operating on behalf of their own sick agenda, nothing more, nothing less.JosiasJessop said:
As I say, I cannot remember anyone saying "Netanyahu is a great guy". That's different from saying that Israel is in a terrible position due to Palestinian actions, and had to do something. Although most of the 'PB Tories' on here seem to say what they did was wrong/too much, and that Netanyahu is a shit.Mexicanpete said:
I specifically suggested "some" and I'm not going to embarrass the guilty, although there is a particular mindset here which would have "right wing good" everything else very bad. @DecrepiterJohnL mentioned Pinochet earlier. There we have an example of that mindset. Although rounding up left wingers and moderates and taking them to a convenient stadium might find some merits of itself here anyway.JosiasJessop said:
I need to pull you up on that. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one poster who has said Netanyahu is a great guy, let alone PB Tories. Many posters were saying he was a shit before October 6th.Mexicanpete said:
I know some of you PB Tories believe Netanyah to be a great guy, but he really is not a nice man. Even Tory grandee Max Hastings believes him to be a very unpleasant chap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Can you even imagine the scenario where UK arrested Netanyahu on a visit to the UK ?biggles said:
Do Heads of Government and foreign ministers not travel with diplomatic immunity?geoffw said:Telegraph
David Lammy has said he would seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu if he visited the UK.
The Foreign Secretary said he would be obliged by law to go to the courts seeking permission for the arrest, saying he had no “discretion” over the issue.
The position is a stark contrast to France, which became the latest Western country to say it would not arrest the Israeli prime minister, leaving Britain isolated among its G7 allies.
(Snip)
Surely tacit support for Netanyahu on here is a given when several posters have justified the flattening of Gaza, the West Bank and South and Central Beirut as a proportionate reaction to October 7?
As for your comment: I'd argue that's also the case for leftists, on steroids. We even have idiots who praise Stalin, Lenin, and the Soviet Union. And as for tankies...
Well, the Hamas operatives are Palestinians, not some strange furry aliens from the Planet Zog.0 -
LostPassword said:
I am still hoping to buy a house. I have been told by my mortgage broker not to use my card to make any purchases at an off licence, or in the pub, because the bank wants six months of bank statements and if they see anything like that I will get flagged as a potential alcoholic, and alcoholics are one of the groups more likely to default on a mortgage.Anabobazina said:
(Use the reply button FFS)Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair?
Similarly there are proposals for the betting companies to be told to share information about how much their customers bet, on the basis of identifying "problem gamblers", and restricting their gambling.
These are two examples. When the data is there, it will be used.
The your broker is an idiot. All the banks is looking for is whether you can afford the mortgage, salary etc. This “my mortgage depends on my not using my card in the pub” is an only-on-PB classic I’m afraid.LostPassword said:
I am still hoping to buy a house. I have been told by my mortgage broker not to use my card to make any purchases at an off licence, or in the pub, because the bank wants six months of bank statements and if they see anything like that I will get flagged as a potential alcoholic, and alcoholics are one of the groups more likely to default on a mortgage.Anabobazina said:
(Use the reply button FFS)Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair?
Similarly there are proposals for the betting companies to be told to share information about how much their customers bet, on the basis of identifying "problem gamblers", and restricting their gambling.
These are two examples. When the data is there, it will be used.0 -
It was and is utterly insignificant in comparison to the other costs imposed by Government. And when the digital system breaks down, as it does regularly now on a local level, people can still buy stuff. At least a dozen times this year I have seen signs in shops saying 'cash only' because the internet is down.In Bingham a couple of months ago the whole town had to revert to cash only because the digital system wasn't working. Without cash how much money would be lost by those shops (actually a lot was lost because many people didn't have cash). And that is before you even start to consider malign players.Anabobazina said:
I’ve read the piece. It’s very light on detail. I do doubt though whether they will extend this burden to online businesses, which already have an edge over physical shops. Unless they make it universal, it’s yet more bad news for the high street. Going cashless is (or was) a neat way for proper shops to reduce their overheads.Richard_Tyndall said:
Read the article Andy links to. Or look for yourself. There are plenty more news articles about both Norway and Sweden reversing the drive towards a cashless society for many of the reasons you have always claimed don't matter. Clearly they have more foresight than you.Anabobazina said:
Do they also mandate that online businesses must accept cash? Or is it a regulation they only burden bricks-and-mortar outlets with?Richard_Tyndall said:On the issue of cash, much to Anabobazina's chagrin, I am happy to predict that the UK will follow the progressive example of Norway and Sweden and reverse the trend away from cash, mandating that shops must accept it and advising all citizens to keep and use it.
I am sure Anabob will sadly never see the light but those with more forethought have already rejected the cashless future.1 -
I have this bridge for you to buy.Anabobazina said:LostPassword said:
I am still hoping to buy a house. I have been told by my mortgage broker not to use my card to make any purchases at an off licence, or in the pub, because the bank wants six months of bank statements and if they see anything like that I will get flagged as a potential alcoholic, and alcoholics are one of the groups more likely to default on a mortgage.Anabobazina said:
(Use the reply button FFS)Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair?
Similarly there are proposals for the betting companies to be told to share information about how much their customers bet, on the basis of identifying "problem gamblers", and restricting their gambling.
These are two examples. When the data is there, it will be used.
The your broker is an idiot. All the banks is looking for is whether you can afford the mortgage, salary etc. This “my mortgage depends on my not using my card in the pub” is an only-on-PB classic I’m afraid.LostPassword said:
I am still hoping to buy a house. I have been told by my mortgage broker not to use my card to make any purchases at an off licence, or in the pub, because the bank wants six months of bank statements and if they see anything like that I will get flagged as a potential alcoholic, and alcoholics are one of the groups more likely to default on a mortgage.Anabobazina said:
(Use the reply button FFS)Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, the state tracking when, where, and how much you spend is not an argument in favour of digital cash.
"But think of all the state surveillance you're missing out on with cash!"
Do you think ‘The State’ knows how much wine I bought last month, or how often I use Betfair?
Similarly there are proposals for the betting companies to be told to share information about how much their customers bet, on the basis of identifying "problem gamblers", and restricting their gambling.
These are two examples. When the data is there, it will be used.
But cash only.
0 -
However, there's also the question of who does what. Someone needs to be doing the policy wonk work to think through a Conservative plan for the 2030s and beyond, but that's what think tankers and philosophical MPs are for.DavidL said:
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.
Kemi has some specific jobs that only she can do. One is setting the big picture direction of travel. Another is choosing the best lieutenants from the MPs she has available. But the key one is being the only current Conservative politician who most voters have headspace for. She has to look and sound more plausible than the incumbent, or it's game over.0 -
As a citizen of the UK I have been genuinely disappointed with the new government so far. Its not too late for there to be some upside and no sane person is going to wish them other than well since we live with the consequences. There was some new ideas yesterday on rejigging Job Centres that sounded hopeful and I have liked some of what Streeting has been saying.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As I said yesterday Kemi is young and has a lot to learn but she is different and has plenty of time to grow into her role and change the perception of the public about the partyDavidL said:
Possibly not, her efforts in respect of the Post Office do not inspire confidence. But that is the priority. The Tories need a group of thinkers that she can engage with just like Thatcher and Cameron had. No one person has the answers to all these questions, let alone having the time to develop the detail of what is required.Chris said:
Is there any reason she'll be any better at the really hard stuff?DavidL said:
In my adult life by far the best at PMQs was the new Chancellor of Oxford. He was extremely witty, quick on his feet and informed. Even someone as skilled as Blair was caught out regularly. Sad to say it didn't do him any good with the general public.Foxy said:
I have just caught up with PMQs on BBC Sounds, and thought a pretty poor performance by Badenoch. I expected this to be her strength, but she is all over the place and Starmer seems increasingly used to batting her questions away.Mexicanpete said:
She was better yesterday, at least not laying it on thick about Trump/ Musk/Lindsey Graham's hostility towards the Labour Government. Stellantis was an easy hit except 15 months ago they had set out Brexit as the key reason for closing Luton (are there really only 1100 jobs left at Vauxhall in Luton already?) And the ELV target programme was set by her Government (N.B. They were not wrong). Starmer "jetting off" to the G20 was also an odd jibe and supporting the Russian hijacked petition to call for a rerun of the election was naive and a future hostage to fortune for when she becomes PM.algarkirk said:
Kemi's problem, in addition to so far just not being all that good, is that everything she says either points up the uselessness of the governing outfit she was part of by agreeing with it, or by shifting away from it, or by drawing attention to how hard it is for Labour to deal with the Tory legacy.Eabhal said:
I don't think anyone could claim she's a brilliant PMQs performer. She's pretty dire - but then the last really good one was probably Cameron?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not all accountsLeon said:
That is pretty good. Well done Kemi. Simple and straightforward yet - as you imply - that is what is needed. Sounds honest. Direct. Straight to camera. She's certainly more likeable and less shifty than Sir Sheer WankerBurgessian said:Kemi Badenoch straight to camera on immigration.
"We need to talk about immigration".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpgV-hT6puc
Quite effective, I think. Guarding the Reform-inclined flank, as well.
And yet, by all accounts, she is dire at PMQs (not watched it)
Hmmm........
Just a couple of Starmer’s fan base who seem to be getting very wound up by her, whilst their leaders government languishes at 19% approval
And in the same way approval ratings and polling aren't particularly good indicators for an election 4.5 years away, she's got plenty of time to improve.
Unless and until - there is time - she deals with core philosophy, core principle and coherent policy, and what it is to be a mainstream Tory right now (I voted Tory for 50 years and have no idea what they think on any of these things) she is wasting her time and ours.
It's a bit early to call her as another flopped Tory leader, but she does need to come up with a more coherent narrative. Her own speech at the CBI was rambling and vague.
Kemi has a lot to do to make the Tories a credible party of government. She needs to find credible ways of reducing the size of the State, reducing the tax burden, increasing both public and private investment, skills and training in the UK and providing public services at a cost that the economy can bare. Being better at PMQs probably doesn't even feature on the list.
The pile on her yesterday came from posters who wouldn't vote for her anyway and it's a bit rich when their party languishes with a 19% approval rating and Reeves has delivered an anti growth budget widely attacked by those who actually create the wealth to pay for her public sector largesse
The budget was a massive disappointment. There was so little original thinking. So little new ideas for investment. So much additional spending without any real thought of whether this was affordable and compatible with growth. She would have been better increasing IT than making it more expensive to employ people. She should have hidden this by sorting out the mess with NI and IT and by making everyone pay the same rate. But no, we had a depressing combination of incompetence, contradictory policies and incoherence. I'd really hoped for better.1 -
Which is utterly ghastly, and people hate.Andy_JS said:My local Marks and Spencer cafe has just become cashless. Disappointing. You also have to use big screens to order things, like in McDonalds or Burger King.
There will be a backlash to this.0 -
Which is utterly ghastly, and people hate.Andy_JS said:My local Marks and Spencer cafe has just become cashless. Disappointing. You also have to use big screens to order things, like in McDonalds or Burger King.
There will be a backlash to this.0 -
How does one pronounce Aontu ?LostPassword said:
Aontu and Independent Ireland doing well could well be the story of this election, though at the moment it's mostly notable for the very modest changes on nearly five years ago.HYUFD said:
They may but have been leaking to Aontu, who as the most anti immigration and anti abortion of the Irish parties shows even Ireland is not immune to the western swing to the populist rightLostPassword said:One thing to bear in mind with the Irish election is that Sinn Fein have been much more ambitious with their candidate selection this time. They have 71 candidates, while in 2020 they stood only 42, of which 37 were elected. If they had stood more candidates in 2020 it's generally thought that they would have had more TDs elected, so they could make quite a few gains even with roughly the same vote share split, which was 24.5% - 22.2% - 20.9% for SF - FF - FG last time.
It's easier to say than, perhaps, Illaungraffanavrankagh - but can someone elucidite?0
