Fewer than one in ten people think Badenoch would make the best PM – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Barings and BCCI were different.DecrepiterJohnL said:
There was an important reason for separating regulation from the Bank of England, but I cannot recall what it was. Something about a conflict of interest in one of the markets where the BoE was player as well as referee.Fishing said:
It wasn't that it was light touch. It was that it was singularly incompetent, focusing on box-checking rather than outputs, missing God knows how many indicators of over leverage and run by incompetent quangocrats like the original Master of Disaster Lord Turner or Sir Callum McCarthy, whose only qualification seemed to be hanging a huge picture of him with Blair in his office. Divorcing it from the competent and experienced people in the Bank of England was a peculiarly stupid move as well.kinabalu said:
We needed more spending. The place was a mess. But I can agree one thing. Light touch regulation of the City was a big mistake.theProle said:
Go on then? Which bits didn't happen? Did Blair and Brown not massively expand state spending on the basis of having "abolished boom and bust"?kinabalu said:
That's just tory story. NL had plenty of achievements.theProle said:
One Tony Blair got the Labour Party 13 years of government with a massive majority.kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
The stupid things he and his chancellor did with that massive majority (mainly spending borrowed money like drunken sailors because interests rates were low, and they'd "abolished boom and bust") are root causes of much of the mess we are in today.
The time round the country has grudgingly let Labour back into government because the Tories have blotted their copy book so badly they couldn't be allowed to continue. Labour has promptly reverted to type - anti-growth taxes, unsustainable borrowing, no attempt to get value for money from spending. And unlike 1997 they haven't started with a golden inheritance which gave them some spare cash to spend.
Frankly the country needs them gone now, not 15 years more of the same.
Isn't the whopping structural deficit that appeared in 2008 when the bust finally arrived the result of treating tax receipts at the top of a huge boom as permanent?
Even the row about removing the WFA (which needed to happen) is this government undoing one of Gordon's nakedly political creations - he could have just bumped the state pension by the same amount for the same effect.
Course the Cons would have been lighter still but that's no excuse. And, yes, it created a bubble that when it burst left us very exposed.
If they'd had competent people and bothered to listen more to what their mid-level officials were telling them, the financial crisis might well have been very different, or even avoided altogether.
But in any case, there were failures and scandals under the Bank of England too, such as BCCI and Baring's, so let's not pretend the BoE was infallible or that changes in regulator were a cause of the GFC.
Barings was a smallish bank that fucked up internally. The matter was handled by the other banks stepping up and taking over, under the supervision of the Bank of England. Old style fix that worked, in this case.
BCCI was an international problem. A bank that had simply gone to the dark side. The UK effect of them going down was actually fairly small.
2008 was a general, systematic failure and something the regulators should have had more control over. Margin Call is a very, very good movie, but people were calling time on the derivatives bubble years earlier. A chap at the Bank of England research unit, who I knew, wrote an academic paper on the probable end(s) of the bubble.3 -
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.1 -
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)0 -
What do Jimmy Savile and Arthur Scargill have in common?kinabalu said:
Don't worry, I'm not a Scargill fan. He exploited the miners for his own ends.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
Both fucked minors/miners.1 -
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)0 -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/DJGamfL4ZvbyZ5Fw9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copyrcs1000 said:
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)0 -
So hard to remember. I used to go there quite a bit. Normally around lunchtime, so I could combine my visit with an outstanding sandwich from Birley's. Then often again in the evening to go to the very tiny champagne bar that used to be there (can't recall the name).rcs1000 said:
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)0 -
I know the Royal Exchange. And I've been on the old LIFFE floor (all the way back in 1994).Malmesbury said:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/DJGamfL4ZvbyZ5Fw9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copyrcs1000 said:
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)
I'm sure they aren't the same place.0 -
But only one of them went to Maggie’s for Christmas.TheScreamingEagles said:
What do Jimmy Savile and Arthur Scargill have in common?kinabalu said:
Don't worry, I'm not a Scargill fan. He exploited the miners for his own ends.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
Both fucked minors/miners.2 -
And yet having been in for only six months, it's premature to judge LABOUR's record on growth: the current growth figures are their legacy.IanB2 said:The Sunday Rawnsley:
Ms Reeves’s most significant problem is not that she’s done things that aren’t popular. That is an occupational hazard and she has the consolation of knowing she has yet to arouse the visceral dislike experienced by George Osborne when he was so “beleaguered” that he got booed at the Paralympics... Her fundamental problem is so obvious that it can be seen from outer space. The economy is flatlining. We’re not enjoying the “growth, growth, growth” that she and Sir Keir promised.
Elements of the government’s programme, including increased investment in infrastructure, pension reforms and the liberalisation of the planning regime, ought to make a difference over time. But in the here and now, it is the paucity of growth that makes Ms Reeves vulnerable. Unless some growth turns up soon, the government is going to face some seriously ugly choices about taxation and spending this year. That’s why Labour people have become so jittery.
One miscalculation was made before the election. This was to assume that bringing down the curtain on the Tory clown show and committing to “stability” and “fiscal responsibility” would be enough in themselves to lift the economy. Another error was made in the immediate aftermath of the election. That was to overdo the doom music about Labour’s inheritance.
For all that, rumours of Ms Reeves’s imminent demise seem to me grossly exaggerated. One reason I say this is because she is lucky in her opponents, especially the Tory ones. It may have become boringly predictable to hear her answer Conservative attacks with scorn for their dismal legacy, but it is true that they left behind a dreadful mess, and voters know it to be so.
When chancellors are suddenly forced out, it is usually for one of two reasons. Some are brought down by a credibility-shattering shock. Jim Callaghan left the Treasury in 1967 when Harold Wilson’s Labour government…was forced to devalue the pound. Norman Lamont was done for by the Black Wednesday humiliation in the early 1990s. The most recent entry in this category is Kwasi Kwarteng… The other common cause of the abrupt termination of a chancellorship is an unbridgeable difference of opinion with the prime minister. That was the case with the resignation of Peter Thorneycroft from Harold Macmillan’s government in 1958 and Nigel Lawson’s departure from Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet in 1989.
[Starmer] owns the government’s economic strategy as much as she does. Throwing her overboard would not be strong and decisive. It would look feeble and desperate. And also pointless, because her successor would be confronted with precisely the same dilemmas…So prime minister and chancellor are lashed to the same mast and bound to the same hope that the gloom will be pierced by glimmers of higher growth. Whether it turns up will decide their entwined fates.
So this article's main thrust misses.0 -
....the legacy they inherited I mean.0
-
The Royal exchange and the old LIFFE floor are definitely the same place. Whether the actual floor was the space that you showed in your snap I'm not so sure. There might be different floors etc.rcs1000 said:
I know the Royal Exchange. And I've been on the old LIFFE floor (all the way back in 1994).Malmesbury said:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/DJGamfL4ZvbyZ5Fw9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copyrcs1000 said:
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)
I'm sure they aren't the same place.
Nobody here remembers Robin Baldwin do they? A wonderful man - larger than life - drank himself to death. I always think of him when I think of the Royal Exchange.0 -
LEAVE 52%TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
REMAIN 48%
0 -
“Originally located in the historic Royal Exchange building near Bank, it later transferred to Cannon Bridge in 1991.…”rcs1000 said:
I know the Royal Exchange. And I've been on the old LIFFE floor (all the way back in 1994).Malmesbury said:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/DJGamfL4ZvbyZ5Fw9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copyrcs1000 said:
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)
I'm sure they aren't the same place.
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/derivatives/london-international-financial-futures-exchange-liffe/2 -
Another good link from you. Thank you again.Luckyguy1983 said:
The times are very different though. In Thatcher's time, a Government's mandate was still respected, albeit grudgingly. Nobody disputed that Thatcher ran the country (though the Treasury was playing its own games even then).Leon said:
It was pretty bad BUT Thatcher had a plan - however brutal - and she was charismatic and clever and determined and politically gifted, and she was surrounded by some serious talentAlanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Oh well
These days, politicians are constrained by a thicket of obstruction consisting of the burgeoning civil service, independent arms length bodies, the judiciary, and the media. They really can't do anything. Consider a recent case where The High Court struck down a Government consultation on long term sick pay: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-is-the-high-court-ruling-on-political-consultations/ The Government had done a consultation (itself usually a civil service delaying tactic), decided to move ahead with the policy, Labour had come in and continued with it, but the High Court has ruled the consultation unlawful, effectively nullifying the policy. How the fuck is it their business?0 -
More importantly Scargill used Thatcher's right to buy, the right to buy he condemned at the time.Theuniondivvie said:
But only one of them went to Maggie’s for Christmas.TheScreamingEagles said:
What do Jimmy Savile and Arthur Scargill have in common?kinabalu said:
Don't worry, I'm not a Scargill fan. He exploited the miners for his own ends.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
Both fucked minors/miners.0 -
FFS, it's dark at 5 o clock!!
0 -
Can I just say that I’m glad that I have effortlessly established another PB memeDaveyboy1961 said:FFS, it's dark at 5 o clock!!
*bows with a swoop of his hat, like a cavalier*0 -
A year from now we can Google the first person to come up with it.Leon said:
Can I just say that I’m glad that I have effortlessly established another PB memeDaveyboy1961 said:FFS, it's dark at 5 o clock!!
*bows with a swoop of his hat, like a cavalier*
Oh, wait...0 -
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.0 -
I am putting up a new thread, but you won't be able to comment on it, as I am doing some tests about embedding Blue Sky and other social media platforms into headers.
It will be deleted in 30 mins or so2 -
The 2008 financial crisis was caused, to a large extent, by banking regulation that determined that the amount of capital that a bank needed to hold for each dollar of assets depended on a very formulaic assessment.Malmesbury said:
Barings and BCCI were different.DecrepiterJohnL said:
There was an important reason for separating regulation from the Bank of England, but I cannot recall what it was. Something about a conflict of interest in one of the markets where the BoE was player as well as referee.Fishing said:
It wasn't that it was light touch. It was that it was singularly incompetent, focusing on box-checking rather than outputs, missing God knows how many indicators of over leverage and run by incompetent quangocrats like the original Master of Disaster Lord Turner or Sir Callum McCarthy, whose only qualification seemed to be hanging a huge picture of him with Blair in his office. Divorcing it from the competent and experienced people in the Bank of England was a peculiarly stupid move as well.kinabalu said:
We needed more spending. The place was a mess. But I can agree one thing. Light touch regulation of the City was a big mistake.theProle said:
Go on then? Which bits didn't happen? Did Blair and Brown not massively expand state spending on the basis of having "abolished boom and bust"?kinabalu said:
That's just tory story. NL had plenty of achievements.theProle said:
One Tony Blair got the Labour Party 13 years of government with a massive majority.kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
The stupid things he and his chancellor did with that massive majority (mainly spending borrowed money like drunken sailors because interests rates were low, and they'd "abolished boom and bust") are root causes of much of the mess we are in today.
The time round the country has grudgingly let Labour back into government because the Tories have blotted their copy book so badly they couldn't be allowed to continue. Labour has promptly reverted to type - anti-growth taxes, unsustainable borrowing, no attempt to get value for money from spending. And unlike 1997 they haven't started with a golden inheritance which gave them some spare cash to spend.
Frankly the country needs them gone now, not 15 years more of the same.
Isn't the whopping structural deficit that appeared in 2008 when the bust finally arrived the result of treating tax receipts at the top of a huge boom as permanent?
Even the row about removing the WFA (which needed to happen) is this government undoing one of Gordon's nakedly political creations - he could have just bumped the state pension by the same amount for the same effect.
Course the Cons would have been lighter still but that's no excuse. And, yes, it created a bubble that when it burst left us very exposed.
If they'd had competent people and bothered to listen more to what their mid-level officials were telling them, the financial crisis might well have been very different, or even avoided altogether.
But in any case, there were failures and scandals under the Bank of England too, such as BCCI and Baring's, so let's not pretend the BoE was infallible or that changes in regulator were a cause of the GFC.
Barings was a smallish bank that fucked up internally. The matter was handled by the other banks stepping up and taking over, under the supervision of the Bank of England. Old style fix that worked, in this case.
BCCI was an international problem. A bank that had simply gone to the dark side. The UK effect of them going down was actually fairly small.
2008 was a general, systematic failure and something the regulators should have had more control over. Margin Call is a very, very good movie, but people were calling time on the derivatives bubble years earlier. A chap at the Bank of England research unit, who I knew, wrote an academic paper on the probable end(s) of the bubble.
Mortgages and AAA rated securities required very little capital. Loans to small businesses required a lot.
1 -
Brexit isn’t forever though, any Party is welcome to campaign and stand for election, to form a government and apply to rejoin. They just need it to be so important to enough people and the rest of the EU to want us back.Mexicanpete said:
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.
So why not lobby your party of choice and demand it, I’m guessing enough people do want it so it’s a shoe-in.1 -
When through humour a serious point is nonetheless being made, i.e. Scargill is a Soviet loving **** for backing Brexit, reposting 52% plays 48% is incredibly annoying. We lost, we sucked it up and now the penny has dropped and the majority have buyer's remorse.Sunil_Prasannan said:
LEAVE 52%TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
REMAIN 48%
Pointing out 52% v 48% isn't very helpful nine years on.0 -
Not quite. If the courts strike down a consultation process it is because the government, or some arm of the state, has not followed its own laws. A requirement to consult, where it exists, is generally a statutory or regulatory requirement. Courts don't just make up requirements to consult. What courts do is declare whether or not such a process has followed the law. That governments have to obey the law (their own laws!) is fundamental to the difference between us and North Korea, Russia and Trump's America. We should be very slow the knock the principle.Luckyguy1983 said:
The times are very different though. In Thatcher's time, a Government's mandate was still respected, albeit grudgingly. Nobody disputed that Thatcher ran the country (though the Treasury was playing its own games even then).Leon said:
It was pretty bad BUT Thatcher had a plan - however brutal - and she was charismatic and clever and determined and politically gifted, and she was surrounded by some serious talentAlanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Oh well
These days, politicians are constrained by a thicket of obstruction consisting of the burgeoning civil service, independent arms length bodies, the judiciary, and the media. They really can't do anything. Consider a recent case where The High Court struck down a Government consultation on long term sick pay: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-is-the-high-court-ruling-on-political-consultations/ The Government had done a consultation (itself usually a civil service delaying tactic), decided to move ahead with the policy, Labour had come in and continued with it, but the High Court has ruled the consultation unlawful, effectively nullifying the policy. How the fuck is it their business?
Unlike Joe Public governments have an immense power to change to law to suit their purposes, so they should be held doubly accountable for obeying it.1 -
Is that a deep fake Hoff???0
-
0
-
There you go...Malmesbury said:
“Originally located in the historic Royal Exchange building near Bank, it later transferred to Cannon Bridge in 1991.…”rcs1000 said:
I know the Royal Exchange. And I've been on the old LIFFE floor (all the way back in 1994).Malmesbury said:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/DJGamfL4ZvbyZ5Fw9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copyrcs1000 said:
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)
I'm sure they aren't the same place.
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/derivatives/london-international-financial-futures-exchange-liffe/0 -
Not really. The reason the GFC was global and not confined to a couple of overextended banks was that because there was no way of knowing who was exposed to whom, including at one or two removes, once the Feds let Lehmans fail (footnote: London also refused to rescue the American bank for the same reason of unknowable extended risk) the whole market seized up. Fun fact: the bottom-end mortgages everyone worried about turned out not to be the problem.rcs1000 said:
The 2008 financial crisis was caused, to a large extent, by banking regulation that determined that the amount of capital that a bank needed to hold for each dollar of assets depended on a very formulaic assessment.Malmesbury said:
Barings and BCCI were different.DecrepiterJohnL said:
There was an important reason for separating regulation from the Bank of England, but I cannot recall what it was. Something about a conflict of interest in one of the markets where the BoE was player as well as referee.Fishing said:
It wasn't that it was light touch. It was that it was singularly incompetent, focusing on box-checking rather than outputs, missing God knows how many indicators of over leverage and run by incompetent quangocrats like the original Master of Disaster Lord Turner or Sir Callum McCarthy, whose only qualification seemed to be hanging a huge picture of him with Blair in his office. Divorcing it from the competent and experienced people in the Bank of England was a peculiarly stupid move as well.kinabalu said:
We needed more spending. The place was a mess. But I can agree one thing. Light touch regulation of the City was a big mistake.theProle said:
Go on then? Which bits didn't happen? Did Blair and Brown not massively expand state spending on the basis of having "abolished boom and bust"?kinabalu said:
That's just tory story. NL had plenty of achievements.theProle said:
One Tony Blair got the Labour Party 13 years of government with a massive majority.kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
The stupid things he and his chancellor did with that massive majority (mainly spending borrowed money like drunken sailors because interests rates were low, and they'd "abolished boom and bust") are root causes of much of the mess we are in today.
The time round the country has grudgingly let Labour back into government because the Tories have blotted their copy book so badly they couldn't be allowed to continue. Labour has promptly reverted to type - anti-growth taxes, unsustainable borrowing, no attempt to get value for money from spending. And unlike 1997 they haven't started with a golden inheritance which gave them some spare cash to spend.
Frankly the country needs them gone now, not 15 years more of the same.
Isn't the whopping structural deficit that appeared in 2008 when the bust finally arrived the result of treating tax receipts at the top of a huge boom as permanent?
Even the row about removing the WFA (which needed to happen) is this government undoing one of Gordon's nakedly political creations - he could have just bumped the state pension by the same amount for the same effect.
Course the Cons would have been lighter still but that's no excuse. And, yes, it created a bubble that when it burst left us very exposed.
If they'd had competent people and bothered to listen more to what their mid-level officials were telling them, the financial crisis might well have been very different, or even avoided altogether.
But in any case, there were failures and scandals under the Bank of England too, such as BCCI and Baring's, so let's not pretend the BoE was infallible or that changes in regulator were a cause of the GFC.
Barings was a smallish bank that fucked up internally. The matter was handled by the other banks stepping up and taking over, under the supervision of the Bank of England. Old style fix that worked, in this case.
BCCI was an international problem. A bank that had simply gone to the dark side. The UK effect of them going down was actually fairly small.
2008 was a general, systematic failure and something the regulators should have had more control over. Margin Call is a very, very good movie, but people were calling time on the derivatives bubble years earlier. A chap at the Bank of England research unit, who I knew, wrote an academic paper on the probable end(s) of the bubble.
Mortgages and AAA rated securities required very little capital. Loans to small businesses required a lot.2 -
Someone I saw on Facebook (I know) was advocating Breturn. As I’ve posted frequently before Brexit was a very very silly idea and people who grumble about Starmer forget what a gold-plated prat Johnson was. And Cameron was very little better. After all, he treated his coalition partners as his enemies, not the party opposite to him in the House of Commons.boulay said:
Brexit isn’t forever though, any Party is welcome to campaign and stand for election, to form a government and apply to rejoin. They just need it to be so important to enough people and the rest of the EU to want us back.Mexicanpete said:
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.
So why not lobby your party of choice and demand it, I’m guessing enough people do want it so it’s a shoe-in.3 -
I've done some lyrics on the Miners strike. Can't come up with a tune thoughTheScreamingEagles said:
More importantly Scargill used Thatcher's right to buy, the right to buy he condemned at the time.Theuniondivvie said:
But only one of them went to Maggie’s for Christmas.TheScreamingEagles said:
What do Jimmy Savile and Arthur Scargill have in common?kinabalu said:
Don't worry, I'm not a Scargill fan. He exploited the miners for his own ends.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
Both fucked minors/miners.
Colin Clogg is the name and I worked for the National Coal
Till Thatcher’s bootboys came and closed down the bountiful hole
In the summer of 84 we were struggling, just wanting no more
By end of June, Orgreave had fell, it's a time I remember oh so well
The night they drove Old Yorkie down. With all the brass bands playing
The night they drove Old Yorkie down. And all the people were saying, they went ...
"Maggie Maggie fuck off, Maggie Maggie Maggie Maggie Maggie fuck off"
Sat with the wife in Barnsley, when one day she calls to me
"Colin, quick, come here. There goes King Arthur in tears"
Now, I don't mind toiling hard, and I don't care if my fingers get charred
You dig what you need and you leave the rest
But they should never have shat on the very best
The night they drove Old Yorkie down. With all the brass bands playing
The night they drove Old Yorkie down. And all the people were saying, they went ...
"Maggie Maggie fuck off, Maggie Maggie Maggie Maggie Maggie fuck off"
Like my father before me, worked with my hands
And like my brothers stood with me, I took a union stand
I was just 19, proud and red, but a copper kicked me in the head
I swear by the dirt below my shoe you can't raise a Clogg back up when he's black and blue
The night they drove Old Yorkie down. With all the brass bands playing
The night they drove Old Yorkie down. And all the people were saying, they went ...
"Maggie Maggie fuck off, Maggie Maggie Maggie Maggie Maggie fuck off"0 -
Especially since we now understand that there was much in the Brexit campaign that was utterly dishonestly declared.Mexicanpete said:
When through humour a serious point is nonetheless being made, i.e. Scargill is a Soviet loving **** for backing Brexit, reposting 52% plays 48% is incredibly annoying. We lost, we sucked it up and now the penny has dropped and the majority have buyer's remorse.Sunil_Prasannan said:
LEAVE 52%TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
REMAIN 48%
Pointing out 52% v 48% isn't very helpful nine years on.4 -
Hence theMexicanpete said:
When through humour a serious point is nonetheless being made, i.e. Scargill is a Soviet loving **** for backing Brexit, reposting 52% plays 48% is incredibly annoying. We lost, we sucked it up and now the penny has dropped and the majority have buyer's remorse.Sunil_Prasannan said:
LEAVE 52%TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
REMAIN 48%
Pointing out 52% v 48% isn't very helpful nine years on. emoji... 0 -
Steady on! I voted for Brexit and Starmer too!TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.
0 -
Brexit is forever? Never! What a defeatist attitude! We shall overcome!Mexicanpete said:
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.3 -
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.0 -
Remarkable judgement.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Steady on! I voted for Brexit and Starmer too!TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.0 -
There is an interview with Michael Heseltine in The Times today. Among other things he talks about this
He recalls his own emergence as a public figure when the Tories went into opposition in 1974. “Who was leading the attack? Me. Every day. And on Sunday, I got up and did it all over again. That’s opposition. You never take time off. And it will rapidly emerge who’s any good at it.”
Someone who the polls suggest is clearly good at it is Nigel Farage. Virtually every conversation I have with a Conservative these days covers whether they should try to destroy Farage or do a deal with him.
“Destroy him,” Heseltine snaps. “Farage is about economic failure and immigration. It’s the worst stirring of the racial pot.
and this
He thinks some sort of mobility deal allowing under-30s to live and work in the EU, which even Starmer is wary of, is a “very good idea”.
“This is where you have to be prepared to take Farage on. Are you going to deny that to the young generations, the cultural opportunities of Europe, the social opportunities? You’ve got to be aggressive about it and paint it as an older generation denying the young what they have taken for granted all their adult lives.”
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/michael-heseltine-interview-nigel-farage-destroy-8dvj6jmnx7 -
Be fair. There is rejoicing in Heaven over the sinner which repenteth.Foxy said:
Remarkable judgement.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Steady on! I voted for Brexit and Starmer too!TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.1 -
Council giving out air fryers to 6,000 pensioners
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7vdz0gyrego
North Lincs doing something practical to help the heat or eat generation because air fryers are far more efficient than conventional ovens, often with better results too.
Mind you it will probably turn out they are reporting all your recipes to the Chinese government.3 -
A good framing from Hezza there. Frozen out of home ownership. Can't go to uni without taking on a big debt. Oh and while we're at it, forget about moving freely around Europe.Scott_xP said:There is an interview with Michael Heseltine in The Times today. Among other things he talks about this
He recalls his own emergence as a public figure when the Tories went into opposition in 1974. “Who was leading the attack? Me. Every day. And on Sunday, I got up and did it all over again. That’s opposition. You never take time off. And it will rapidly emerge who’s any good at it.”
Someone who the polls suggest is clearly good at it is Nigel Farage. Virtually every conversation I have with a Conservative these days covers whether they should try to destroy Farage or do a deal with him.
“Destroy him,” Heseltine snaps. “Farage is about economic failure and immigration. It’s the worst stirring of the racial pot.
and this
He thinks some sort of mobility deal allowing under-30s to live and work in the EU, which even Starmer is wary of, is a “very good idea”.
“This is where you have to be prepared to take Farage on. Are you going to deny that to the young generations, the cultural opportunities of Europe, the social opportunities? You’ve got to be aggressive about it and paint it as an older generation denying the young what they have taken for granted all their adult lives.”
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/michael-heseltine-interview-nigel-farage-destroy-8dvj6jmnx5 -
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.3 -
Although there's a place for non-useful things. Life enrichment etc.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.1 -
That's the mirror image of how @Williamglenn voted. Uncanny.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Steady on! I voted for Brexit and Starmer too!TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.0 -
The paradox is that a liberal arts education for its own sake is condemned as left wing (woke) in America and right wing (Gove) over here.kinabalu said:
Although there's a place for non-useful things. Life enrichment etc.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.0 -
All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.1
-
I bet a chunk forgot to turn their mobile phones off. The Israelis should be able to generate a nice list of interesting people from that.SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
0 -
But they're civilians...SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
0 -
Aren't you sure it was the ones sitting right next to him, and not the LDs? John Major certainly thought so.OldKingCole said:
Someone I saw on Facebook (I know) was advocating Breturn. As I’ve posted frequently before Brexit was a very very silly idea and people who grumble about Starmer forget what a gold-plated prat Johnson was. And Cameron was very little better. After all, he treated his coalition partners as his enemies, not the party opposite to him in the House of Commons.boulay said:
Brexit isn’t forever though, any Party is welcome to campaign and stand for election, to form a government and apply to rejoin. They just need it to be so important to enough people and the rest of the EU to want us back.Mexicanpete said:
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.
So why not lobby your party of choice and demand it, I’m guessing enough people do want it so it’s a shoe-in.0 -
Wasn't Gove more about trad teaching methods than art for arts sake?DecrepiterJohnL said:
The paradox is that a liberal arts education for its own sake is condemned as left wing (woke) in America and right wing (Gove) over here.kinabalu said:
Although there's a place for non-useful things. Life enrichment etc.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.0 -
.
Latin absolutely is worth studying. The question is whether it commands its place on the curriculum, which excludes as well as includes. More so than, say, Sanskrit, which I'm sure is also a fascinating subject?kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.2 -
...
Remember kids, 'Arfur Scargill is not as bad as a whole Scargill.TheScreamingEagles said:
What do Jimmy Savile and Arthur Scargill have in common?kinabalu said:
Don't worry, I'm not a Scargill fan. He exploited the miners for his own ends.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
Both fucked minors/miners.1 -
LIFFE moved from the Royal Excahnge to above Canon Street station.rcs1000 said:
I know the Royal Exchange. And I've been on the old LIFFE floor (all the way back in 1994).Malmesbury said:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/DJGamfL4ZvbyZ5Fw9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copyrcs1000 said:
I don't think so.Omnium said:
That's the old LIFFE floor isn't it?Malmesbury said:
Fortnum & Mason have a branch in the Royal Exchange building, in the atrium.DecrepiterJohnL said:
You can do "afternoon tea at" almost anywhere in London, all the top hotels and famous shops, and they have all been vlogged on YouTube for your previewing pleasure.JosiasJessop said:
We did 22 in Cambridge a couple of years ago for my 50th. It was very nice.kjh said:
After my last visit to a chain restaurant in November I have vowed never again will I go to a chain restaurant or middling restaurant. I can cook better than that so it is a waste of money and it isn't cheap. I book Michelin star or Michelin recommended restaurants or good quality pubs. We did The Cat Inn is Sussex on Saturday for instance and 22 in Cambridge in November.JosiasJessop said:
A fool and his money...TheScreamingEagles said:
Three course meal works out at around £150 a head from the a la carte menu based on what I ordered last time.Leon said:
Seeing as you don’t drink alcohol I find it hard to believe you spend more than £150 a head, and that would be really hard almost anywhere but insane seafood places maybe. Food simply isn’t THAT expensive, unless you’re going to a top 20 world class restaurant for a tasting menuTheScreamingEagles said:
Wait until they see what JohnO and myself spend on our PB Tory lunches.Taz said:Talking of Badenoch this is a bizarre attack on her. Spending £12.70 on a steak for lunch. So what.
https://x.com/mikeysmith/status/1880585881658249248?s=61
£35 starter
£50 main
£20 dessert
Add in non alcoholic drinks and 15% service charge
https://www.claridges.co.uk/siteassets/restaurants--bars/foyer--reading-room/menus/2025/the-foyer-and-reading-room-all-day-dining-january-2025.pdf
I like going out and having a *really* nice meal occasionally. Perhaps once or twice a year, as (or at) an event. I couldn't stand doing it regularly.
Twice the price, but then do it half as many times if money is an issue. And I can cook a decent meal so I do more at home with friends and I definitely can't do Michelin star cooking, but which I really enjoy. I am always so disappointed when leaving a bog standard restaurant. Not so much because of the food, but that I paid so much for it when I could have done better.
But I know what you mean re children. if you want to take them out it is very expensive. Thankfully I am past that now.
Mrs J has a big birthday this year, and I'm thinking of afternoon tea at Fortnum and Masons (somewhere we love), followed by the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I'm all culture.
(I know the building is where it was, but I think actually that space?)
I'm sure they aren't the same place.
0 -
No, but if you want to fault Gove, he was driven by nostalgia for what he had enjoyed at school, so PE and games and art could sod off. Just this week Tory Baroness Nicholson blamed the rise in mental illness to Gove putting the kybosh on primary school music and singing.kinabalu said:
Wasn't Gove more about trad teaching methods than art for arts sake?DecrepiterJohnL said:
The paradox is that a liberal arts education for its own sake is condemned as left wing (woke) in America and right wing (Gove) over here.kinabalu said:
Although there's a place for non-useful things. Life enrichment etc.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.1 -
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.0 -
Well, for a start, philosophy is not taught in most schools even if it should be, but agreed on the value of basic diy skills.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.
0 -
The Carbon Capture scheme was a policy from the last government. Strictly the criticism of Miliband is he hasn't cancelled it.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
TBH the announcement from both governments beyond the initial £4 billion investment in Teesside is so vague it's hard to know what the project is and whether it's a good idea. It seems to be promoted by fossil fuel producers0 -
I am just shy of 63. If I live 20 years reverse-Brexit ain't happening in my lifetime, so for me Brexit is forever.Fairliered said:
Brexit is forever? Never! What a defeatist attitude! We shall overcome!Mexicanpete said:
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.0 -
Omg I hope not, I'm 64 this week!Mexicanpete said:
I am just shy of 63. If I live 20 years reverse-Brexit ain't happening in my lifetime, so for me Brexit is forever.Fairliered said:
Brexit is forever? Never! What a defeatist attitude! We shall overcome!Mexicanpete said:
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.
2 -
Happy Birthday!Daveyboy1961 said:
Omg I hope not, I'm 64 this week!Mexicanpete said:
I am just shy of 63. If I live 20 years reverse-Brexit ain't happening in my lifetime, so for me Brexit is forever.Fairliered said:
Brexit is forever? Never! What a defeatist attitude! We shall overcome!Mexicanpete said:
At least you can vote Starmer out in 4 years time. Brexit is forever, irrespective of how unpopular and how shit it becomes. And the Brexiteers are cheerleading Musk to overthrow a legitimately elected Government they dislike, whilst simultaneously cheering on someone who tried to end democracy on January 6th 2021. Democracy in action I suppose. "It's a funny old game Saint".TheScreamingEagles said:
They get oddly defensive when you point out the Brexit they voted for is equally shit.Mexicanpete said:...
It's nice to see Leon and the Field Marshal riffing happily together on another of their "Reeves is shit" threads. Enjoy!! But I'll sit this out.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
Leon wins prizes for voting for Brexit and Starmer.4 -
Now then now then now thenMexicanpete said:...
Remember kids, 'Arfur Scargill is not as bad as a whole Scargill.TheScreamingEagles said:
What do Jimmy Savile and Arthur Scargill have in common?kinabalu said:
Don't worry, I'm not a Scargill fan. He exploited the miners for his own ends.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
Both fucked minors/miners.
1 -
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
1 -
There's a lot of that going on. See Truss's Chagos arrangements.FF43 said:
The Carbon Capture scheme was a policy from the last government. Strictly the criticism of Miliband is he hasn't cancelled it.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
TBH the announcement from both governments beyond the initial £4 billion investment in Teesside is so vague it's hard to know what the project is and whether it's a good idea. It seems to be promoted by fossil fuel producers
I think if one argued these policies were rubbish under the Tories they are obliged to hate them under Labour. Likewise, if they were happy for some of this nonsense to go ahead under the Tories they should remain content under Labour.2 -
I am retired and have no dog in the fight, but the suggestion that people are taught to draft their own wills is, IMHO, extremely bad advice to anyone with assets of any real significance. The combined possibilities of inadequate drafting, inadequate performance of the necessary validation and attestation and overlooking the possibilities of the I(PFD) Act of 1975 get lawyers rubbing their hands together. Don't.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.3 -
'Draft' is perhaps the right word here; it's a bit risky for anything other than 'I leave it to Mum/my dear spouse'. If you get the notion into their heads they they need one, and where to go to get it done [edited], that's doing well.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.
I'm reminded of the ending of Tom Sharpe's novel 'Wilt' where he changes the FE College syllabus to include more basic stuff for his apprentice butchers on study afternoons off, i.e. what to do when the police take an interest in you.0 -
This isn't a difficult question. One is more intimately linked with our own cultural history than the other and has ongoing relevance in various professional fields.FF43 said:.
Latin absolutely is worth studying. The question is whether it commands its place on the curriculum, which excludes as well as includes. More so than, say, Sanskrit, which I'm sure is also a fascinating subject?kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.0 -
With Trump in the Whitehouse if the ceasefire is breached by Bibi in the form of carpet bombing Gaza to dust there will be no consequences.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
1 -
Or, just as bad, no will at all (perhaps not so bad in Scotland where the family are guarenteed to get something, but in other ways it's still a huge pain, as I know from being an executor in such a case).algarkirk said:
I am retired and have no dog in the fight, but the suggestion that people are taught to draft their own wills is, IMHO, extremely bad advice to anyone with assets of any real significance. The combined possibilities of inadequate drafting, inadequate performance of the necessary validation and attestation and overlooking the possibilities of the I(PFD) Act of 1975 get lawyers rubbing their hands together. Don't.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.1 -
If only Keir hadn't messed it all up. Somehow. This whole "middle-east" thing is his fault, right? It was all a-okay until about July last year, as I remember.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
1 -
...williamglenn said:
This isn't a difficult question. One is more intimately linked with our own cultural history than the other and has ongoing relevance in various professional fields.FF43 said:.
Latin absolutely is worth studying. The question is whether it commands its place on the curriculum, which excludes as well as includes. More so than, say, Sanskrit, which I'm sure is also a fascinating subject?kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.0 -
My dad was in a few meetings with him. He disliked him but says he was formidable.Mexicanpete said:...
Remember kids, 'Arfur Scargill is not as bad as a whole Scargill.TheScreamingEagles said:
What do Jimmy Savile and Arthur Scargill have in common?kinabalu said:
Don't worry, I'm not a Scargill fan. He exploited the miners for his own ends.TheScreamingEagles said:
Scargill is a Brit hating traitor.kinabalu said:
Old school, he was. Brexit supporter.williamglenn said:
Yes, for example there is a direct line from smashing the unions to mass immigration. Arthur Scargill would never have stood for importing millions of workers to serve the interests of the bosses and the rich.kinabalu said:
But otoh she isn't blamed for many things she ought to be blamed for.williamglenn said:
Many of the things she gets blamed for didn't really happen until Blair was in power.kinabalu said:
What, so Mrs Thatcher actually intended to destroy our industrial base, our sense of community, our housing system and concentrate wealth and opportunity in the South East of England?Alanbrooke said:
You mean like the farmers today, or the unheated pensioners, or business owners about to sack their staff because they cant afford to employ them ?kinabalu said:
Worse. People were scratching their heads. And they were scared. It looked like a doom loop.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, and it was nowhere near this bad.kinabalu said:
You're not old enough to remember Thatcher?Alanbrooke said:
That's certainly the case, but doesnt stop it being true. This is one of the worst starts to office in living memory.kinabalu said:
You'd say that regardless tbf.Alanbrooke said:
You dont think thats anything to do with your policies being crap and your front bench worse ?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
AS @Leon says at least Thatcher had a plan, catastrrophe Reeves is just making it up as she goes along.
Oh well that's alright then. So long as there was a plan.
But I was more thinking housing, rip off utilities, asset stripping, veneration of the City and financial wheeler dealing over real value added work, this sort of thing.
He took money from opponents of the UK, such as Libya and the Soviet Union, of course he backed Brexit.
Both fucked minors/miners.1 -
I wish 'proper' home cooking/DIY skills were taught. The main home-economics lessons I remember are "how to make a knitted pom-pom" and "making a pizza" (which was a bread roll, some tomato puree and grated cheddar under the grill). Metalwork was a sort of weird garden implement that made no sense at all. Basically cutting a triangle out of a rectangle but not calling it a 'shiv'.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Well, for a start, philosophy is not taught in most schools even if it should be, but agreed on the value of basic diy skills.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.1 -
Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
If I was a Hamas fighter in danger of being killed by the IDF I might well teach my son to carry on my fight.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
And if I were the son or grandson of a fighter for Palestinian rights I might well be proud to carry on the family tradition.1 -
Hmmm... I can think of a few other things that might also have caused a rise in mental illness.DecrepiterJohnL said:
No, but if you want to fault Gove, he was driven by nostalgia for what he had enjoyed at school, so PE and games and art could sod off. Just this week Tory Baroness Nicholson blamed the rise in mental illness to Gove putting the kybosh on primary school music and singing.kinabalu said:
Wasn't Gove more about trad teaching methods than art for arts sake?DecrepiterJohnL said:
The paradox is that a liberal arts education for its own sake is condemned as left wing (woke) in America and right wing (Gove) over here.kinabalu said:
Although there's a place for non-useful things. Life enrichment etc.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.1 -
There's something in this. If you have to choose only one, you would choose Latin over Sanskrit. But would you choose either? Latin isn't that intimately linked with our culture.williamglenn said:
This isn't a difficult question. One is more intimately linked with our own cultural history than the other and has ongoing relevance in various professional fields.FF43 said:.
Latin absolutely is worth studying. The question is whether it commands its place on the curriculum, which excludes as well as includes. More so than, say, Sanskrit, which I'm sure is also a fascinating subject?kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.0 -
5g implants, you mean?rcs1000 said:
Hmmm... I can think of a few other things that might also have caused a rise in mental illness.DecrepiterJohnL said:
No, but if you want to fault Gove, he was driven by nostalgia for what he had enjoyed at school, so PE and games and art could sod off. Just this week Tory Baroness Nicholson blamed the rise in mental illness to Gove putting the kybosh on primary school music and singing.kinabalu said:
Wasn't Gove more about trad teaching methods than art for arts sake?DecrepiterJohnL said:
The paradox is that a liberal arts education for its own sake is condemned as left wing (woke) in America and right wing (Gove) over here.kinabalu said:
Although there's a place for non-useful things. Life enrichment etc.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.0 -
I genuinely don't know if it's nonsense. BP, Total Energy and Equinor who are apparently investing in this carbon capture programme presumably don't think it's nonsense for them.Mexicanpete said:
There's a lot of that going on. See Truss's Chagos arrangements.FF43 said:
The Carbon Capture scheme was a policy from the last government. Strictly the criticism of Miliband is he hasn't cancelled it.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
TBH the announcement from both governments beyond the initial £4 billion investment in Teesside is so vague it's hard to know what the project is and whether it's a good idea. It seems to be promoted by fossil fuel producers
I think if one argued these policies were rubbish under the Tories they are obliged to hate them under Labour. Likewise, if they were happy for some of this nonsense to go ahead under the Tories they should remain content under Labour.1 -
Cooking. Sharp knives for every pupil. What could go wrong? Well, the LEA and academy trust might blanch at the cost of providing kitchens. Another reason air fryers are the future!ohnotnow said:
I wish 'proper' home cooking/DIY skills were taught. The main home-economics lessons I remember are "how to make a knitted pom-pom" and "making a pizza" (which was a bread roll, some tomato puree and grated cheddar under the grill). Metalwork was a sort of weird garden implement that made no sense at all. Basically cutting a triangle out of a rectangle but not calling it a 'shiv'.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Well, for a start, philosophy is not taught in most schools even if it should be, but agreed on the value of basic diy skills.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.1 -
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jan/19/ministry-of-defence-enlists-sci-fi-writers-to-prepare-for-dystopian-futures
Something for our SF enthusiasts?0 -
I had PB Tories and client journalists in mind.FF43 said:
I genuinely don't know if it's nonsense. BP, Total Energy and Equinor who are apparently investing in this programme presumably don't think it's nonsense for them.Mexicanpete said:
There's a lot of that going on. See Truss's Chagos arrangements.FF43 said:
The Carbon Capture scheme was a policy from the last government. Strictly the criticism of Miliband is he hasn't cancelled it.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
TBH the announcement from both governments beyond the initial £4 billion investment in Teesside is so vague it's hard to know what the project is and whether it's a good idea. It seems to be promoted by fossil fuel producers
I think if one argued these policies were rubbish under the Tories they are obliged to hate them under Labour. Likewise, if they were happy for some of this nonsense to go ahead under the Tories they should remain content under Labour.0 -
Come to that, replace ‘son’ with ‘daughter’. Etc. See the IRA. And as far as most of Ireland, they won.OldKingCole said:Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
If I was a Hamas fighter in danger of being killed by the IDF I might well teach my son to carry on my fight.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
And if I were the son or grandson of a fighter for Palestinian rights I might well be proud to carry on the family tradition.0 -
In terms of current relevance to modern professions, one can discount classics teachers as they have skin in the game anyway - and RC priests don't need it now so much apart from their doctrinal studies? That leaves botanists.FF43 said:
There's something in this. If you have to choose only one, you would choose Latin over Sanskrit. But would you choose either? Latin isn't that intimately linked with our culture.williamglenn said:
This isn't a difficult question. One is more intimately linked with our own cultural history than the other and has ongoing relevance in various professional fields.FF43 said:.
Latin absolutely is worth studying. The question is whether it commands its place on the curriculum, which excludes as well as includes. More so than, say, Sanskrit, which I'm sure is also a fascinating subject?kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
Edit: and university lecturers in classics, just as one has them in Sanskrit.
2 -
The inability to 'freely' go and pick turnips in Transylvania must really cramp the lives of young Britons.kinabalu said:
A good framing from Hezza there. Frozen out of home ownership. Can't go to uni without taking on a big debt. Oh and while we're at it, forget about moving freely around Europe.Scott_xP said:There is an interview with Michael Heseltine in The Times today. Among other things he talks about this
He recalls his own emergence as a public figure when the Tories went into opposition in 1974. “Who was leading the attack? Me. Every day. And on Sunday, I got up and did it all over again. That’s opposition. You never take time off. And it will rapidly emerge who’s any good at it.”
Someone who the polls suggest is clearly good at it is Nigel Farage. Virtually every conversation I have with a Conservative these days covers whether they should try to destroy Farage or do a deal with him.
“Destroy him,” Heseltine snaps. “Farage is about economic failure and immigration. It’s the worst stirring of the racial pot.
and this
He thinks some sort of mobility deal allowing under-30s to live and work in the EU, which even Starmer is wary of, is a “very good idea”.
“This is where you have to be prepared to take Farage on. Are you going to deny that to the young generations, the cultural opportunities of Europe, the social opportunities? You’ve got to be aggressive about it and paint it as an older generation denying the young what they have taken for granted all their adult lives.”
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/michael-heseltine-interview-nigel-farage-destroy-8dvj6jmnx
Lets deal with the reality here:
1) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe are going to be allowed to get a job in Europe.
The problem is that over 90% don't have the skillset to get a job in Europe because language skills are so mediocre in this country.
2) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe will also have the skillset to get a job in this country and very likely find it easier to do so and get higher paid.
The problem is that there are too many who don't have the skillset to get a job in this country - note a skillset includes having a worthwhile work ethic.
4 -
Sure there will be consequences: just not what people expect.Mexicanpete said:
With Trump in the Whitehouse if the ceasefire is breached by Bibi in the form of carpet bombing Gaza to dust there will be no consequences.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
I'm going with revolution in a number of Arab states.0 -
Really ?OldKingCole said:
Come to that, replace ‘son’ with ‘daughter’. Etc. See the IRA. And as far as most of Ireland, they won.OldKingCole said:Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
If I was a Hamas fighter in danger of being killed by the IDF I might well teach my son to carry on my fight.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
And if I were the son or grandson of a fighter for Palestinian rights I might well be proud to carry on the family tradition.
over 6000 dead, 80 years of theocracy, permanent division.
If that's victory it wasnt worth it.0 -
As an historical aside, the grammar/secondary modern schools split was intended to have a third component: technical schools. These would be the most expensive, and nowhere could afford the workshops and kitchens that would be needed.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Cooking. Sharp knives for every pupil. What could go wrong? Well, the LEA and academy trust might blanch at the cost of providing kitchens. Another reason air fryers are the future!ohnotnow said:
I wish 'proper' home cooking/DIY skills were taught. The main home-economics lessons I remember are "how to make a knitted pom-pom" and "making a pizza" (which was a bread roll, some tomato puree and grated cheddar under the grill). Metalwork was a sort of weird garden implement that made no sense at all. Basically cutting a triangle out of a rectangle but not calling it a 'shiv'.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Well, for a start, philosophy is not taught in most schools even if it should be, but agreed on the value of basic diy skills.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.2 -
There you go again, talking down Britain.another_richard said:
The inability to 'freely' go and pick turnips in Transylvania must really cramp the lives of young Britons.kinabalu said:
A good framing from Hezza there. Frozen out of home ownership. Can't go to uni without taking on a big debt. Oh and while we're at it, forget about moving freely around Europe.Scott_xP said:There is an interview with Michael Heseltine in The Times today. Among other things he talks about this
He recalls his own emergence as a public figure when the Tories went into opposition in 1974. “Who was leading the attack? Me. Every day. And on Sunday, I got up and did it all over again. That’s opposition. You never take time off. And it will rapidly emerge who’s any good at it.”
Someone who the polls suggest is clearly good at it is Nigel Farage. Virtually every conversation I have with a Conservative these days covers whether they should try to destroy Farage or do a deal with him.
“Destroy him,” Heseltine snaps. “Farage is about economic failure and immigration. It’s the worst stirring of the racial pot.
and this
He thinks some sort of mobility deal allowing under-30s to live and work in the EU, which even Starmer is wary of, is a “very good idea”.
“This is where you have to be prepared to take Farage on. Are you going to deny that to the young generations, the cultural opportunities of Europe, the social opportunities? You’ve got to be aggressive about it and paint it as an older generation denying the young what they have taken for granted all their adult lives.”
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/michael-heseltine-interview-nigel-farage-destroy-8dvj6jmnx
Lets deal with the reality here:
1) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe are going to be allowed to get a job in Europe.
The problem is that over 90% don't have the skillset to get a job in Europe because language skills are so mediocre in this country.
2) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe will also have the skillset to get a job in this country and very likely find it easier to do so and get higher paid.
The problem is that there are too many who don't have the skillset to get a job in this country - note a skillset includes having a worthwhile work ethic.0 -
I did Latin for the first three years at Grammar School, then switched to Science, where it was off the curriculum. However I’d done enough to cope with medical/pharmaceutical dog Latin. No-one nowadays uses phrases like ‘cochlum amplum’ though.Carnyx said:
In terms of current relevance to modern professions, one can discount classics teachers as they have skin in the game anyway - and RC priests don't need it now so much apart from their doctrinal studies? That leaves botanists.FF43 said:
There's something in this. If you have to choose only one, you would choose Latin over Sanskrit. But would you choose either? Latin isn't that intimately linked with our culture.williamglenn said:
This isn't a difficult question. One is more intimately linked with our own cultural history than the other and has ongoing relevance in various professional fields.FF43 said:.
Latin absolutely is worth studying. The question is whether it commands its place on the curriculum, which excludes as well as includes. More so than, say, Sanskrit, which I'm sure is also a fascinating subject?kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
Edit: and university lecturers in classics, just as one has them in Sanskrit.3 -
And there's only a limited number of senior civil service roles where such people can earn a decent wage.another_richard said:
The inability to 'freely' go and pick turnips in Transylvania must really cramp the lives of young Britons.kinabalu said:
A good framing from Hezza there. Frozen out of home ownership. Can't go to uni without taking on a big debt. Oh and while we're at it, forget about moving freely around Europe.Scott_xP said:There is an interview with Michael Heseltine in The Times today. Among other things he talks about this
He recalls his own emergence as a public figure when the Tories went into opposition in 1974. “Who was leading the attack? Me. Every day. And on Sunday, I got up and did it all over again. That’s opposition. You never take time off. And it will rapidly emerge who’s any good at it.”
Someone who the polls suggest is clearly good at it is Nigel Farage. Virtually every conversation I have with a Conservative these days covers whether they should try to destroy Farage or do a deal with him.
“Destroy him,” Heseltine snaps. “Farage is about economic failure and immigration. It’s the worst stirring of the racial pot.
and this
He thinks some sort of mobility deal allowing under-30s to live and work in the EU, which even Starmer is wary of, is a “very good idea”.
“This is where you have to be prepared to take Farage on. Are you going to deny that to the young generations, the cultural opportunities of Europe, the social opportunities? You’ve got to be aggressive about it and paint it as an older generation denying the young what they have taken for granted all their adult lives.”
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/michael-heseltine-interview-nigel-farage-destroy-8dvj6jmnx
Lets deal with the reality here:
1) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe are going to be allowed to get a job in Europe.
The problem is that over 90% don't have the skillset to get a job in Europe because language skills are so mediocre in this country.
2) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe will also have the skillset to get a job in this country and very likely find it easier to do so and get higher paid.
The problem is that there are too many who don't have the skillset to get a job in this country - note a skillset includes having a worthwhile work ethic.
*grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*0 -
Also basic financial knowledge.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.
0 -
Shaun Murphy playing like me when I've had a couple tonight.
Quite the contrast from his utterly dominant display this afternoon.1 -
I never did any Latin or Greek, and it wasn't a problem at Med School.OldKingCole said:
I did Latin for the first three years at Grammar School, then switched to Science, where it was off the curriculum. However I’d done enough to cope with medical/pharmaceutical dog Latin. No-one nowadays uses phrases like ‘cochlum amplum’ though.Carnyx said:
In terms of current relevance to modern professions, one can discount classics teachers as they have skin in the game anyway - and RC priests don't need it now so much apart from their doctrinal studies? That leaves botanists.FF43 said:
There's something in this. If you have to choose only one, you would choose Latin over Sanskrit. But would you choose either? Latin isn't that intimately linked with our culture.williamglenn said:
This isn't a difficult question. One is more intimately linked with our own cultural history than the other and has ongoing relevance in various professional fields.FF43 said:.
Latin absolutely is worth studying. The question is whether it commands its place on the curriculum, which excludes as well as includes. More so than, say, Sanskrit, which I'm sure is also a fascinating subject?kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
Edit: and university lecturers in classics, just as one has them in Sanskrit.
One of my boys did it for a year. I think it helped his grammar. English grammar is not well taught in our schools, certainly compared with the grammar that was drilled into me at Elementary School in Atlanta.1 -
I didn’t suggest it was ‘victory’; I’m thinking about ‘revenge’.Alanbrooke said:
Really ?OldKingCole said:
Come to that, replace ‘son’ with ‘daughter’. Etc. See the IRA. And as far as most of Ireland, they won.OldKingCole said:Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
If I was a Hamas fighter in danger of being killed by the IDF I might well teach my son to carry on my fight.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
And if I were the son or grandson of a fighter for Palestinian rights I might well be proud to carry on the family tradition.
over 6000 dead, 80 years of theocracy, permanent division.
If that's victory it wasnt worth it.
0 -
Revenge doesnt get you that far.OldKingCole said:
I didn’t suggest it was ‘victory’; I’m thinking about ‘revenge’.Alanbrooke said:
Really ?OldKingCole said:
Come to that, replace ‘son’ with ‘daughter’. Etc. See the IRA. And as far as most of Ireland, they won.OldKingCole said:Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
If I was a Hamas fighter in danger of being killed by the IDF I might well teach my son to carry on my fight.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
And if I were the son or grandson of a fighter for Palestinian rights I might well be proud to carry on the family tradition.
over 6000 dead, 80 years of theocracy, permanent division.
If that's victory it wasnt worth it.
So why would you want to teach it to your children ?1 -
My sci-fi dystopia is a world where there's a chronic shortage of dystopic sci-fiCarnyx said:https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jan/19/ministry-of-defence-enlists-sci-fi-writers-to-prepare-for-dystopian-futures
Something for our SF enthusiasts?1 -
What an odd thing to want your child to have.OldKingCole said:
I didn’t suggest it was ‘victory’; I’m thinking about ‘revenge’.Alanbrooke said:
Really ?OldKingCole said:
Come to that, replace ‘son’ with ‘daughter’. Etc. See the IRA. And as far as most of Ireland, they won.OldKingCole said:Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
If I was a Hamas fighter in danger of being killed by the IDF I might well teach my son to carry on my fight.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
And if I were the son or grandson of a fighter for Palestinian rights I might well be proud to carry on the family tradition.
over 6000 dead, 80 years of theocracy, permanent division.
If that's victory it wasnt worth it.
I assume you support Israelis wanting that by the same principle or is it a one way street?0 -
EKOS Canada
Conservatives 39%
Liberals 28%
NDP 17%
BQ 7%
Greens 5%
PPC 3%
https://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2025/01/conservative-lead-narrows-to-11-points/0 -
Talking up Britain. Young British people don't want to work in mainland Europe not because there's anything wrong with them, but because they can do better elsewhere already.Foxy said:
There you go again, talking down Britain.another_richard said:
The inability to 'freely' go and pick turnips in Transylvania must really cramp the lives of young Britons.kinabalu said:
A good framing from Hezza there. Frozen out of home ownership. Can't go to uni without taking on a big debt. Oh and while we're at it, forget about moving freely around Europe.Scott_xP said:There is an interview with Michael Heseltine in The Times today. Among other things he talks about this
He recalls his own emergence as a public figure when the Tories went into opposition in 1974. “Who was leading the attack? Me. Every day. And on Sunday, I got up and did it all over again. That’s opposition. You never take time off. And it will rapidly emerge who’s any good at it.”
Someone who the polls suggest is clearly good at it is Nigel Farage. Virtually every conversation I have with a Conservative these days covers whether they should try to destroy Farage or do a deal with him.
“Destroy him,” Heseltine snaps. “Farage is about economic failure and immigration. It’s the worst stirring of the racial pot.
and this
He thinks some sort of mobility deal allowing under-30s to live and work in the EU, which even Starmer is wary of, is a “very good idea”.
“This is where you have to be prepared to take Farage on. Are you going to deny that to the young generations, the cultural opportunities of Europe, the social opportunities? You’ve got to be aggressive about it and paint it as an older generation denying the young what they have taken for granted all their adult lives.”
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/michael-heseltine-interview-nigel-farage-destroy-8dvj6jmnx
Lets deal with the reality here:
1) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe are going to be allowed to get a job in Europe.
The problem is that over 90% don't have the skillset to get a job in Europe because language skills are so mediocre in this country.
2) Any Britons who have the skillset to get a job in Europe will also have the skillset to get a job in this country and very likely find it easier to do so and get higher paid.
The problem is that there are too many who don't have the skillset to get a job in this country - note a skillset includes having a worthwhile work ethic.
More British people went to work in Australia than the entire mainland EU combined, despite needing visas for the former and not for the latter.1 -
Yes. The assumptions people make about the rules of intestacy are not the same as the legal provisions - at least in England.Carnyx said:
Or, just as bad, no will at all (perhaps not so bad in Scotland where the family are guarenteed to get something, but in other ways it's still a huge pain, as I know from being an executor in such a case).algarkirk said:
I am retired and have no dog in the fight, but the suggestion that people are taught to draft their own wills is, IMHO, extremely bad advice to anyone with assets of any real significance. The combined possibilities of inadequate drafting, inadequate performance of the necessary validation and attestation and overlooking the possibilities of the I(PFD) Act of 1975 get lawyers rubbing their hands together. Don't.Fishing said:
Subjects like history or philosophy may not be directly vocationally useful to most people, but they teach you skills like judging evidence and thinking logically that are, so there is definitely a strong case for keeping them.DecrepiterJohnL said:
If we redesigned the secondary school curriculum from scratch, we'd probably ditch most subjects, not just Latin. Aside from the 3Rs which are (ideally) covered in primary school, there is not a lot left that is useful to most people in the outside world.kinabalu said:
Well that's easy. On the Latin, I enjoyed it, my best subject in fact, but is it a good fit these days? Is it something to continue with? Not sure. My heart says yes, my head says maybe not. And on carbon capture, I'm just not knowledgeable on the subject. I do not know if that's a good use of money.JosiasJessop said:
I'd love to know your reasoning to be happy or unsure about the CCS money or the cancelling latin funding for schools halfway through the year (yes, I know it's a little more complex than that, but even so).kinabalu said:
No. It's a mix of happy and unsure.JosiasJessop said:
Are you really 100% happy with all those listed decisions? Every single one?kinabalu said:
But you don't expect people with tory brain chemistry to feel positive about what Labour governments do. That's only natural.theProle said:
So nobody has a better clue than *paying* £9bn of taxpayers money to give away a island to someone else it doesn't belong to?kinabalu said:
But nobody has a better clue. So let's settle down and see how they get on.Leon said:
10 or 15 years to do….. what? What is the big plan? Where’s the vision, the lodestar, the exciting new route for the UK? What do you want to do with power? How are you going to change the UK for the better, and when, and how much will it cost?kinabalu said:
Ah that "dissolve the people" thing. Yes.Malmesbury said:
Google translate, my friend.kinabalu said:
I'd have a chance in French?Malmesbury said:
Nach dem Aufstand des 17. Junikinabalu said:
I do wish voters would stick to what they usually do rather than constantly moving around. You can't make plans when they're like this.Malmesbury said:
Labour supporters leaving the party are heading left to the Greens and the Gaza parties. Or going to Reform.SandyRentool said:
While the targeting at the GE was, of course, very successful, you must be concerned that the LDs have failed to progress as Labour support has declined?Barnesian said:
The Lib Dem strategy has been totally and successfully focused on target seats. The national share was irrelevant. 100 seats at 50% and the rest at 5% gives a national share of about 13%, which is a meaningless measure.SandyRentool said:
Here's a metric:Malmesbury said:A
I’m surprised at the Lib Dem’s who want to dump their leader. In favour of whom exactly? By what metric do they think they are not doing well enough and who/how could this be improved?Cicero said:
While I am partisan, I do genuinely think that Sir Ed is wildly underestimated. I think his clear move towards Rejoin is carving out unique territory for the Lib Dems, and he also has some very impressive people on the Lib Dem benches. People know that Farage is a media creature and Brexit is now an unambiguous failure. Few of the extremely partisan commentators in the media give him the time of day, but it is Sir Ed, not Farage, that has the Parliamentary advantage. Watch this space for astute and intelligent moves.Theuniondivvie said:
On his last outing Kinnear came close to killing a former Tory campaign manager which might be considered by Sir Ed for his next stunt.Barnesian said:
Ed Davey reminds me of Rory Kinnear who did make a decent PM.FF43 said:Ed Davey likely would make a decent PM, certainly better than two others on that list.
He comes from a party that hasn't produced prime ministers for a hundred years however.
Since the GE Labour have dropped from 35% to around 25%. But the LibDems have flatlined.
Not good enough.
However this strategy limits the Lib Dems to being a junior party in a coalition (hiss) or C&S.
I think there will be a change to a more national campaign (on top of the local campaigns) to broaden the ambition. Ed Davey's recent call for joining the customs union might a sign of that.
National share will then become an important metric.
Not sure that the Lib Dens are fishing in either pool.
Ließ der Sekretär des Schriftstellerverbands
In der Stalinallee Flugblätter verteilen
Auf denen zu lesen war, daß das Volk
Das Vertrauen der Regierung verscherzt habe
It’s a poem by Bertolt Brecht - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Lösung
Thing is, there is a serious point here. We (Labour) need 10 to 15 years to transform the country. But we only get 6 months before people start getting antsy, poring over polls, fretting about "lack of narratives" bla bla.
It's a recipe for perpetual frustration and disappointment. For everybody.
Answer came there none, because Labour has No Fucking Clue. THIS is why your government is already historically unpopular, it’s not because voters are all short-attention-span idiots asking too much, it’s because they can rightly see that Labour’s big idea consists of overpaying public sector workers and punting a plan for social care to 2028 because they have no fucking idea what to do
We can all read the news. We all read that Sir Sheer Wanker was “unpleasantly surprised” to discover that, when he went into Number 10, “there was no plan”. Yeah, we noticed . You’d think the PM would be across these details, but not
One term government
Nobody has a better clue than vindictivly pulling Latin teaching from schools *mid school year*, thus messing up the education of a whole bunch of kids who happen to be studying it right now.
Nobody has a better clue for raising tax than taxing *employment* more.
Nobody has a better clue about energy than letting that fool Miliband blow £20bn on pointless carbon capture.
I could go on, but you get the picture. On most of these, doing nothing whatsoever would have been better.
The other thing I'd like to see more of in schools is directly useful life skills like the basics of plumbing, carpentry or law which everybody needs at some time in their lives.
You can save a fortune over a lifetime if you can plug a leak and draft your will without calling a professional.1 -
Where did I suggest it was desirable? However, if someone’s down and they’ve been persecuted they tend to become revengeful.Alanbrooke said:
Revenge doesnt get you that far.OldKingCole said:
I didn’t suggest it was ‘victory’; I’m thinking about ‘revenge’.Alanbrooke said:
Really ?OldKingCole said:
Come to that, replace ‘son’ with ‘daughter’. Etc. See the IRA. And as far as most of Ireland, they won.OldKingCole said:Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
If I was a Hamas fighter in danger of being killed by the IDF I might well teach my son to carry on my fight.Foxy said:
If they couldn't destroy Hamas after 16 months of total blockade, total bombardment and total surveillance, how much longer do you think the siege needs to go on?SandyRentool said:All those lads in black balaclavas waving guns in the air. The IDF still has a job to do.
And if I were the son or grandson of a fighter for Palestinian rights I might well be proud to carry on the family tradition.
over 6000 dead, 80 years of theocracy, permanent division.
If that's victory it wasnt worth it.
So why would you want to teach it to your children ?0
This discussion has been closed.