Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The economy may no longer be Donald’s trump card – politicalbetting.com

1356

Comments

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,290
    edited 11:09AM

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    It seems to me the only way Trump can force a quick end to the war that isn't a clear win for Russia is to threaten Putin with a continuation (or even escalation) of US military support for Ukraine if he doesn't make big meaningful concessions. However he can't threaten this with any credibility because he's already made it clear he isn't prepared to stay involved militarily. "You make a deal or we're out" he said to Zelensky in the WH, and for once I think he was speaking the truth. That is his position.

    So otoh he wants to get his big moment and live up to his self-image as the great dealmaker, but otoh he can't and won't force Russia to back down from its red lines (being they keep what they've taken and Ukraine gets no Art 5 type protection on the rest). Any deal would therefore be mainly on Russia's terms and can happen only if Ukraine feels forced to sign it due to having no realistic alternative. I think that's what this boils down to now. Will Europe's offer allow Zelensky to genuinely feel that no deal is better than a bad deal?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,855

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,189
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    It seems to me the only way Trump can force a quick end to the war that isn't a clear win for Russia is to threaten Putin with a continuation (or even escalation) of US military support for Ukraine if he doesn't make big meaningful concessions. However he can't threaten this with any credibility because he's already made it clear he isn't prepared to stay involved militarily. "You make a deal or we're out" he said to Zelensky in the WH, and for once I think he was speaking the truth. That is his position.

    So otoh he wants to get his big moment and live up to his self-image as the great dealmaker, but otoh he can't and won't force Russia to back down from its red lines (being they keep what they've taken and Ukraine gets no Art 5 type protection on the rest). Any deal would therefore be mainly on Russia's terms and can happen only if Ukraine feels forced to sign it due to having no realistic alternative. I think that's what this boils down to now. Will Europe's offer allow Zelensky to genuinely feel that no deal is better than a bad deal?
    Zelensky has already agreed to a US proposed ceasefire, even if not yet a final peace deal as that depends on what Russia propose
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,316

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    I just ignore the ignorant dinosaurs.
    You can both believe that no-one can change gender but at the same time give people the curtesy of addressing them how they wish to be addressed. Basic politeness.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,290
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    I am afraid you can't tell a nation which has the largest number of nuclear missiles on earth to 'F Off.'

    To get a ceasefire you need Ukranian AND Russian agreement and if that means only allowing peacekeeping troops from mainly non NATO nations so be it. Ukraine has already accepted the Trump administration's ceasefire terms so if Russia accepts too that is where we are whatever Europe does
    A 30 day ceasefire isn't "the deal" though. Although Trump might present it like that.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,956
    edited 11:15AM
    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Unfair.
    From wanting to be the Federation to wanting to be the Klingons (before the wishy washy wokeness of their later iterations naturally).
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,149
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    I am afraid you can't tell a nation which has the largest number of nuclear missiles on earth to 'F Off.'

    To get a ceasefire you need Ukranian AND Russian agreement and if that means only allowing peacekeeping troops from mainly non NATO nations so be it. Ukraine has already accepted the Trump administration's ceasefire terms so if Russia accepts too that is where we are whatever Europe does
    A 30 day ceasefire isn't "the deal" though. Although Trump might present it like that.
    "It's gonna be beautiful!"
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,316
    Blimey - I see Starmer has abolished the NHS in England...

    Oh wait - he's abolished NHS England!
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,296
    edited 11:18AM

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    Grok means 'to understand'. It's a term that was taken from Heinlein and has been rattling around the tech (and US tech) culture since at least the 70s.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    Grok isn’t a character

    It a Native Martian word meaning something like “Complete understanding and empathy with something at every possible level and in every possible way”.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,463
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    I am afraid you can't tell a nation which has the largest number of nuclear missiles on earth to 'F Off.'

    To get a ceasefire you need Ukranian AND Russian agreement and if that means only allowing peacekeeping troops from mainly non NATO nations so be it. Ukraine has already accepted the Trump administration's ceasefire terms so if Russia accepts too that is where we are whatever Europe does
    A 30 day ceasefire isn't "the deal" though. Although Trump might present it like that.
    Indeed. The Ukrainians have accepted a temporary cessation of hostilities without preconditions. So if the Russians demand preconditions they are rejecting it, and the response should be to ramp up military action against Russia
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,149

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,316

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    Worked for Michael Jackson (eventually)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112

    Blimey - I see Starmer has abolished the NHS in England...

    Oh wait - he's abolished NHS England!

    Blimey:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx29lrl826rt

    Starmer: 'Too much regulation and too many regulators'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70w17dj258o

    Starmer pledges to tackle 'flabby' state
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,795

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Unfair.
    From wanting to be the Federation to wanting to be the Klingons (before the wishy washy wokeness of their later iterations naturally).
    Trump is more a Ferengi
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Unfair.
    From wanting to be the Federation to wanting to be the Klingons (before the wishy washy wokeness of their later iterations naturally).
    Cardassians?

    Or the Draka?
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,855
    This reminds me of The Elon, wh knows and understands everything on behalf of the Mard community, in Von Braun's novel, and ofcourse who Musk was named after by his philandering and seemingly violently abusive father, Erroll.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,947
    edited 11:24AM

    Blimey - I see Starmer has abolished the NHS in England...

    Oh wait - he's abolished NHS England!

    Blimey:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx29lrl826rt

    Starmer: 'Too much regulation and too many regulators'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70w17dj258o

    Starmer pledges to tackle 'flabby' state
    Given the screeching U-Turn, cutting quangos and benefits for the disabled, can't be long until he is talking about the evils of blob....

    Of course words are cheap, proof is in the pudding. So far, Starmer government have been creating new quangos and settings up independent inquires at an incredible rate.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,897
    Goodbye NHS England
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,290

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Oh it will be needed and right now. Waiting until we are practically at war before doing anything about defence is what got us in this mess in the first place*

    *Well one of the things as I remember using that phrase previously in a slightly different context.
    We should be grateful that Trump has been so crudely blunt that only the stupidest, most self-obsessed and most traitorous can still claim that rearmament is not needed.
    Yes, but the degree of it and how it's organised (eg which nations in Europe do what, relative spends and capability, their respective responsibilities to the whole, the scale of nuclear vs conventional deterrence, the command and control structure, intelligence sharing, the relevance of Art 5 without the US), all of this is up for debate and there's a large range of possible outcomes.
    Article 5 can remain. There is no obligation under A5 for all members to become militarily involved if I understand it correctly. US would chose to stay out. They are the burger eating surrender monkeys.
    It can but how meaningful is it without America? They've always been the effective guarantor. The calculus and mindset is very different if they aren't there. Much hinges on Germany, I'd say. They can perhaps make 'Europe looks after Europe' a reality. Otherwise I don't really see it happening.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,956
    At least this raging dimwit didn’t shoot it, or not on camera anyway.

    https://x.com/jasonreiduk/status/1899896338982097008?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,855
    Oh dear.

    "We want to be disruptors, but in a positive way", says one of Starmer's team, today.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,667
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    It seems to me the only way Trump can force a quick end to the war that isn't a clear win for Russia is to threaten Putin with a continuation (or even escalation) of US military support for Ukraine if he doesn't make big meaningful concessions. However he can't threaten this with any credibility because he's already made it clear he isn't prepared to stay involved militarily. "You make a deal or we're out" he said to Zelensky in the WH, and for once I think he was speaking the truth. That is his position.

    So otoh he wants to get his big moment and live up to his self-image as the great dealmaker, but otoh he can't and won't force Russia to back down from its red lines (being they keep what they've taken and Ukraine gets no Art 5 type protection on the rest). Any deal would therefore be mainly on Russia's terms and can happen only if Ukraine feels forced to sign it due to having no realistic alternative. I think that's what this boils down to now. Will Europe's offer allow Zelensky to genuinely feel that no deal is better than a bad deal?
    I think this a pretty good summary of where we are. It's why Europe building up its own military strength is so important, £6bn being cut from benefits should be just the start. Outsourcing our security to America means we have to live with the politics of America, I think a few cuts to the welfare state is a small price to end our obsession with the USA.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,298

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    You don't tend to refer to the colour of someones skin when addressing them or referring to them (except of course for racists), but when addressing or referring to an individual you do use, he, she etc.

    Personally I don't give a toss but if someone wants to be called he or she why not. No harm to you. Just polite really, unless one is looking for an argument.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,301

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    I thought "white" was an adjective rather than a pronoun.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,617
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    I haven't got current stats on that, though I note that Church of England school still seem insanely popular.

    Birbalsingh has an interesting non-stereotyped collection of views and practices, that seem to be to be experience not dogma.

    based.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Birbalsingh

    Her blog is still up giving the flavour of her thinking. Although I'm sure most of it has gone unless you go looking at archive.org. The last post in 2019 was how they encourage pupils to wean themselves off mobile phone dependence.

    https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.com/
    We sent our children to a CofE infants school, although it seemed to have very limited religious content other than being next to a church and if it did we would have had a problem with it as we are both atheists. There were no religious entry requirements.

    We sent our children there because it was good, not for religious reasons.

    I don't know how normal this is.
    Very normal, C of E schools are more likely to be rated Outstanding than the average state school and for secondary school entry you have zero chance of entrance to an oversubscribed Outstanding C of E state school without proof of regular church attendance
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    I haven't got current stats on that, though I note that Church of England school still seem insanely popular.

    Birbalsingh has an interesting non-stereotyped collection of views and practices, that seem to be to be experience not dogma.

    based.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Birbalsingh

    Her blog is still up giving the flavour of her thinking. Although I'm sure most of it has gone unless you go looking at archive.org. The last post in 2019 was how they encourage pupils to wean themselves off mobile phone dependence.

    https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.com/
    We sent our children to a CofE infants school, although it seemed to have very limited religious content other than being next to a church and if it did we would have had a problem with it as we are both atheists. There were no religious entry requirements.

    We sent our children there because it was good, not for religious reasons.

    I don't know how normal this is.
    Very normal, C of E schools are more likely to be rated Outstanding than the average state school and for secondary school entry you have zero chance of entrance to an oversubscribed Outstanding C of E state school without proof of regular church attendance
    True, though worth also noting that CofE primary schools are disproportionately small and rural - village schools - which disproportionately have lower numbers of problem pupils and lower class sizes. Both of which tend to lead to good outcomes.
    Where I am, in a suburb, the CofE school tends to do less well - these advantages no longer exist. Also - because it isn't the only school in the area, it has a religious requirement to join, and the syllabus is more religious in nature - which naturally eats into the teaching time. So it does less well than other schools in the area.

    That's just primary schools - I've never come across a CofE secondary school (I'm not doubting they exist, just that I can't think of any around here - all the religious schools are Catholic, of which there are an astonishing number in Greater Manchester, and they are all very religious and not that good academically.)


  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Oh it will be needed and right now. Waiting until we are practically at war before doing anything about defence is what got us in this mess in the first place*

    *Well one of the things as I remember using that phrase previously in a slightly different context.
    We should be grateful that Trump has been so crudely blunt that only the stupidest, most self-obsessed and most traitorous can still claim that rearmament is not needed.
    Yes, but the degree of it and how it's organised (eg which nations in Europe do what, relative spends and capability, their respective responsibilities to the whole, the scale of nuclear vs conventional deterrence, the command and control structure, intelligence sharing, the relevance of Art 5 without the US), all of this is up for debate and there's a large range of possible outcomes.
    Article 5 can remain. There is no obligation under A5 for all members to become militarily involved if I understand it correctly. US would chose to stay out. They are the burger eating surrender monkeys.
    It can but how meaningful is it without America? They've always been the effective guarantor. The calculus and mindset is very different if they aren't there. Much hinges on Germany, I'd say. They can perhaps make 'Europe looks after Europe' a reality. Otherwise I don't really see it happening.
    Arguably the 'all or nothing' nature of NATO contributed to Putin thinking that he could get away with invading Ukraine.

    Imagine if there were no NATO. It would have been much more difficult for him to predict the extent to which other countries would get involved. Poland wouldn't have had the restraining hand of America on its shoulder.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,290

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    I am afraid you can't tell a nation which has the largest number of nuclear missiles on earth to 'F Off.'

    To get a ceasefire you need Ukranian AND Russian agreement and if that means only allowing peacekeeping troops from mainly non NATO nations so be it. Ukraine has already accepted the Trump administration's ceasefire terms so if Russia accepts too that is where we are whatever Europe does
    A 30 day ceasefire isn't "the deal" though. Although Trump might present it like that.
    Indeed. The Ukrainians have accepted a temporary cessation of hostilities without preconditions. So if the Russians demand preconditions they are rejecting it, and the response should be to ramp up military action against Russia
    But militarily Trump wants to pull out not get further embroiled.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,855

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Oh it will be needed and right now. Waiting until we are practically at war before doing anything about defence is what got us in this mess in the first place*

    *Well one of the things as I remember using that phrase previously in a slightly different context.
    We should be grateful that Trump has been so crudely blunt that only the stupidest, most self-obsessed and most traitorous can still claim that rearmament is not needed.
    Yes, but the degree of it and how it's organised (eg which nations in Europe do what, relative spends and capability, their respective responsibilities to the whole, the scale of nuclear vs conventional deterrence, the command and control structure, intelligence sharing, the relevance of Art 5 without the US), all of this is up for debate and there's a large range of possible outcomes.
    Article 5 can remain. There is no obligation under A5 for all members to become militarily involved if I understand it correctly. US would chose to stay out. They are the burger eating surrender monkeys.
    It can but how meaningful is it without America? They've always been the effective guarantor. The calculus and mindset is very different if they aren't there. Much hinges on Germany, I'd say. They can perhaps make 'Europe looks after Europe' a reality. Otherwise I don't really see it happening.
    Arguably the 'all or nothing' nature of NATO contributed to Putin thinking that he could get away with invading Ukraine.

    Imagine if there were no NATO. It would have been much more difficult for him to predict the extent to which other countries would get involved. Poland wouldn't have had the restraining hand of America on its shoulder.
    And none of Eastern Europe would have necessarily been protected, either.

    Delicious dinner for CommanderPutin.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,667
    @bondegezou taking another L today with the government abolishing NHS management and bureaucracy after his protestations for months that it is impossible and we need more admin staff in the NHS and more managers to suck the blood out of it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,583
    edited 11:37AM
    Foss said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    Grok means 'to understand'. It's a term that was taken from Heinlein and has been rattling around the tech (and US tech) culture since at least the 70s.
    That was cultural misappropriation (to use an anachronism) [edit]. It was the hippies who used it in the days of the flower power counterculture movement. 1960s.

    (No idea what Mr Heinlein thought of that.)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112
    Trump must look on with envy at the power Starmer has to reorganise the state based on a personal whim.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,290
    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    It seems to me the only way Trump can force a quick end to the war that isn't a clear win for Russia is to threaten Putin with a continuation (or even escalation) of US military support for Ukraine if he doesn't make big meaningful concessions. However he can't threaten this with any credibility because he's already made it clear he isn't prepared to stay involved militarily. "You make a deal or we're out" he said to Zelensky in the WH, and for once I think he was speaking the truth. That is his position.

    So otoh he wants to get his big moment and live up to his self-image as the great dealmaker, but otoh he can't and won't force Russia to back down from its red lines (being they keep what they've taken and Ukraine gets no Art 5 type protection on the rest). Any deal would therefore be mainly on Russia's terms and can happen only if Ukraine feels forced to sign it due to having no realistic alternative. I think that's what this boils down to now. Will Europe's offer allow Zelensky to genuinely feel that no deal is better than a bad deal?
    I think this a pretty good summary of where we are. It's why Europe building up its own military strength is so important, £6bn being cut from benefits should be just the start. Outsourcing our security to America means we have to live with the politics of America, I think a few cuts to the welfare state is a small price to end our obsession with the USA.
    Not how I'd be funding it but otherwise yes.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,359

    Trump must look on with envy at the power Starmer has to reorganise the state based on a personal whim.

    "Returning the NHS to democratic control"

    Starmer as Populist.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,677

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    There's a similar, but Tolkien, thing with Peter Thiel's (the one who created JD Vance, who believes and has argued for autocracy over democracy) companies:

    Palantir Technologies
    Valar Ventures
    Mithril Capital Management
    Rivendell One LLC
    Lembas LLC
    Anduril Industries

    Some may recognise Palantir. When Thiel invested in a company setting up JD Vance, it was called Narya Capital - which is also Tolkien (Gandalf's Ring of Power).

    One concerning thing about Thiel is that he has compared the current USA system to the Weimar Republic.

    Both the US Marine Corp ($640m) and the UK (£30m via the International Fund for Ukraine) have signed deals with Anduril Industries in the last week - just to show how well the guy is engaged with government.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,947
    edited 11:45AM
    MaxPB said:

    @bondegezou taking another L today with the government abolishing NHS management and bureaucracy after his protestations for months that it is impossible and we need more admin staff in the NHS and more managers to suck the blood out of it.

    What will be interesting is if they do get the total headcount down, or a bit like BBC reorganisation / staff cuts, all that happens is a rejigging of under what organisation they are actually employed.

    Since Labour came to power, it has created 27 new quangos.

    Since 2019, there are 20% more civil servants and loads more employed in quangos. Starmer is going to have to upset a lot of people if they are really going to tackle this and really go against his natural instincts. He has again today promised no austerity (whatever that actually means).
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,855
    Carnyx said:

    Foss said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    Grok means 'to understand'. It's a term that was taken from Heinlein and has been rattling around the tech (and US tech) culture since at least the 70s.
    That was cultural misappropriation (to use an anachronism) [edit]. It was the hippies who used it in the days of the flower power counterculture movement. 1960s.

    (No idea what Mr Heinlein thought of that.)
    Interesting, I missed that one, with my 1970s early youth being at the second stage of the hippy movement.
    Not heard much by the later 70's, it seems.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,583
    https://www.thenational.scot/news/25004849.donald-trump-aircraft-en-route-edinburgh-airport/?ref=ebbn&nid=1457&u=f140ec39d500193051a33e140c12bd95&date=130325

    Just nipping over on the wee private jet, as one does. Presumably Don Jr is arranging for some more redecoration to Turnberry, after recent events.
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,296
    Carnyx said:

    Foss said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    Grok means 'to understand'. It's a term that was taken from Heinlein and has been rattling around the tech (and US tech) culture since at least the 70s.
    That was cultural misappropriation (to use an anachronism) [edit]. It was the hippies who used it in the days of the flower power counterculture movement. 1960s.

    (No idea what Mr Heinlein thought of that.)
    Given the nature of California at that point, I suspect there was a reasonable overlap between the tech/hippy/scifi/academic communities.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112
    https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1900148728243122565

    It's very weird watching Labour just actually do so many of the things Tories whined privately that they couldn't.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429
    MaxPB said:

    @bondegezou taking another L today with the government abolishing NHS management and bureaucracy after his protestations for months that it is impossible and we need more admin staff in the NHS and more managers to suck the blood out of it.

    The NHS has *both* too much management and too little.

    Too much paper churn, and decisions deferred so that people can all be consulted.

    Too little real management - which is about (among other things) removing the administrative burden from staff doing the actual work. Having senior consultants doing admin is absurd.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,583
    HYUFD said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    They do when the only outstanding state primary or secondary school in their area is a C of E or Roman Catholic school.

    Then you get parents queuing round the block to get into the church congregation on a Sunday for the months leading up to the decision on who gets places so they can get the Vicar's reference
    That's 'they have to put up with it' rather than 'want it', on your own testimony.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,952
    kjh said:

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    You don't tend to refer to the colour of someones skin when addressing them or referring to them (except of course for racists), but when addressing or referring to an individual you do use, he, she etc.

    Personally I don't give a toss but if someone wants to be called he or she why not. No harm to you. Just polite really, unless one is looking for an argument.
    If it's very clearly a man in a dress, perhaps with a beard, who wants to be called "she", he's playing a game, perhaps for fun, perhaps for titillation.

    There is no reason to play his game unless you want to.
    It would be rude of him to expect you to.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,316

    MaxPB said:

    @bondegezou taking another L today with the government abolishing NHS management and bureaucracy after his protestations for months that it is impossible and we need more admin staff in the NHS and more managers to suck the blood out of it.

    What will be interesting is if they do get the total headcount down, or a bit like BBC reorganisation / staff cuts, all that happens is a rejigging of under what organisation they are actually employed.

    Since Labour came to power, it has created 27 new quangos.

    Since 2019, there are 20% more civil servants and loads more employed in quangos. Starmer is going to have to upset a lot of people if they are really going to tackle this and really go against his natural instincts. He has again today promised no austerity (whatever that actually means).
    I think some people imagine these organisations are full of people doing nothing all day.

    Take one example - we work with Health Education England to arrange training placements in the clinic for our pharmacy students. If you abolish them, that job still needs doing by someone.

    As Foxy says, you don't want consultants doing admin.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,290

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Oh it will be needed and right now. Waiting until we are practically at war before doing anything about defence is what got us in this mess in the first place*

    *Well one of the things as I remember using that phrase previously in a slightly different context.
    We should be grateful that Trump has been so crudely blunt that only the stupidest, most self-obsessed and most traitorous can still claim that rearmament is not needed.
    Yes, but the degree of it and how it's organised (eg which nations in Europe do what, relative spends and capability, their respective responsibilities to the whole, the scale of nuclear vs conventional deterrence, the command and control structure, intelligence sharing, the relevance of Art 5 without the US), all of this is up for debate and there's a large range of possible outcomes.
    Article 5 can remain. There is no obligation under A5 for all members to become militarily involved if I understand it correctly. US would chose to stay out. They are the burger eating surrender monkeys.
    It can but how meaningful is it without America? They've always been the effective guarantor. The calculus and mindset is very different if they aren't there. Much hinges on Germany, I'd say. They can perhaps make 'Europe looks after Europe' a reality. Otherwise I don't really see it happening.
    Arguably the 'all or nothing' nature of NATO contributed to Putin thinking that he could get away with invading Ukraine.

    Imagine if there were no NATO. It would have been much more difficult for him to predict the extent to which other countries would get involved. Poland wouldn't have had the restraining hand of America on its shoulder.
    Not the worst point you've ever made. The overriding concern to avoid any semblance of what could be seen or presented by Putin as "Russia v NATO" (and hence a slide to "WW3") arguably led to an overly cautious response to the invasion by the US. All is relative though. If Trump had been president there'd probably have been no response other than "nice one, Vlad".
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112
    Tweet like Trump:

    https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1900141403067257316

    The Prime Minister wants to reduce the number of QUANGOs.

    Today we are abolishing the biggest QUANGO in the world.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,400

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    First you have to develop a liking for Steak and Kidney pie, washed down with a pint of bitter.

    It's required to live in character for 2 years before a change certificate can be granted.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,181
    AnthonyT said:

    I agree with the view that people that have transitioned through surgery and “look” like the gender, can just use the bathroom they were given. After all, how world anyone know?

    A friend of a friend is a trans man, you honestly wouldn’t know - I didn’t - until I was told. I’m frankly not bothered what genitals he has, he’s as male as me as far as I am concerned in practice and is welcome in the male loos.

    I say this sincerely, I do think people have a view of trans people that many - and this is something I see JK Rowling do a lot - just look like men in a dress. I honestly think this is not the case.

    But I do have one question, if we are to take the view of some, he should still be using the female loos?

    Some sadly look less like their newly assigned gender, some more. I think no matter the degree of success of the approximation, once someone has transitioned surgically, they should be able to use their newly assigned genders' loos, and be given a card to show in the unlikely event of being challenged.

    The main issue is men exposing themselves or worse in women's loos. That's solved by allowing them to use women's spaces when fully transitioned. Those in transition and living 'as a woman' can get permission to use disabled facilities, as many do who are not visibly disabled.
    Not this again.

    It's not how they look that matters. It's their sex. Which does not change.

    If one man is allowed in then a loo or changing room or refuge is no longer single sex and all men must be allowed in. Looks are irrelevant. If men are allowed in then women are put at risk (look at the increase in sexual offences in mixed sex loos and changing rooms from schools onwards) and many women and girls will self-exclude.

    Committing indecent exposure to and voyeurism of women are criminal offences, ones that should be taken much more seriously than they are (see Couzens, for instance). They are not human rights for men. Why do men find it so difficult to understand this? Possibly because a lot of men seem to think that they ought to able to do this and rather relish insulting women who object?

    I don't know why you're addressing this rant to me. I have suggested that ftm transsexuals should not be allowed to use women's spaces until they have undergone surgical transition. Yes, sex may be immutable, and they may only be an approximation of female, but I don't think that there's any appreciable risk of the crimes you mention once you exclude those with working male genitalia.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,583
    Foxy said:

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    First you have to develop a liking for Steak and Kidney pie, washed down with a pint of bitter.

    It's required to live in character for 2 years before a change certificate can be granted.
    *hungry* - reminds me I have a Quorn pasty in the fridge and some Black Isle stout.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429

    Tweet like Trump:

    https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1900141403067257316

    The Prime Minister wants to reduce the number of QUANGOs.

    Today we are abolishing the biggest QUANGO in the world.

    It’s an acronym. All capitals for an acronym is literacy.

    Not something Trump is accused of, generally.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,210

    https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1900148728243122565

    It's very weird watching Labour just actually do so many of the things Tories whined privately that they couldn't.

    As time goes by it’s clear the Tories were hit with a kind of depressed inertia after Johnson and Truss. They lost their mojo and their appetite to govern. It was essentially a very long period of packing up shop. A very peculiar time politically.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,755

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Musk is a fan of the "Culture Series", a book sequence written by the Scottish socialist and trade union admirer Iain M Banks, which depicts a post-scarcity society where sex changes are unremarkable, all people have enough of everything, money is irrelevant, but the drones are heavily armed and secretly run the society. Guess which lesson he took from it... 🤔
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,000
    edited 11:53AM
    Starmer's abolition of the world's biggest quango really reflects awfully on the Tories. Unless there's a dramatic change in course for the Tories they're going to be out the running at the next GE and Labour/Reform for all their faults (Both parties) I think will be fighting it out.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,282

    https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1900148728243122565

    It's very weird watching Labour just actually do so many of the things Tories whined privately that they couldn't.

    Huh, didn't the Tories set up NHS England to put some distance between central government and decision making within the NHS?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429

    https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1900148728243122565

    It's very weird watching Labour just actually do so many of the things Tories whined privately that they couldn't.

    As time goes by it’s clear the Tories were hit with a kind of depressed inertia after Johnson and Truss. They lost their mojo and their appetite to govern. It was essentially a very long period of packing up shop. A very peculiar time politically.
    To be fair - if Sunak had tried to abolish NHS England, Starmer would have been supporting the resulting NHS national strike.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,429
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Musk is a fan of the "Culture Series", a book sequence written by the Scottish socialist and trade union admirer Iain M Banks, which depicts a post-scarcity society where sex changes are unremarkable, all people have enough of everything, money is irrelevant, but the drones are heavily armed and secretly run the society. Guess which lesson he took from it... 🤔
    Indeed
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112

    https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1900148728243122565

    It's very weird watching Labour just actually do so many of the things Tories whined privately that they couldn't.

    As time goes by it’s clear the Tories were hit with a kind of depressed inertia after Johnson and Truss. They lost their mojo and their appetite to govern. It was essentially a very long period of packing up shop. A very peculiar time politically.
    The malaise goes all the way back to their period in opposition to New Labour when instead of coming up with new thinking to address the post-millennial issues we faced, simply folded in the face of Blairism and doubled-down on its worst features.
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,296
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Musk is a fan of the "Culture Series", a book sequence written by the Scottish socialist and trade union admirer Iain M Banks, which depicts a post-scarcity society where sex changes are unremarkable, all people have enough of everything, money is irrelevant, but the drones are heavily armed and secretly run the society. Guess which lesson he took from it... 🤔
    The AI defines the terms of that society - the rest is how they entertain their pets.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,052

    Blimey - I see Starmer has abolished the NHS in England...

    Oh wait - he's abolished NHS England!

    I am in the middle of teaching a class, many of whom are employed by NHS England. They are now somewhat distracted.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,505
    Abolishing NHS England?

    Well its a start
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,189
    Pulpstar said:

    Starmer's abolition of the world's biggest quango really reflects awfully on the Tories. Unless there's a dramatic change in course for the Tories they're going to be out the running at the next GE and Labour/Reform for all their faults (Both parties) I think will be fighting it out.

    Yet on latest polls neither Labour nor Reform could have a majority and either Davey or Badenoch will be Kingmakers as to who becomes PM
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,052

    Tweet like Trump:

    https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1900141403067257316

    The Prime Minister wants to reduce the number of QUANGOs.

    Today we are abolishing the biggest QUANGO in the world.

    It’s an acronym. All capitals for an acronym is literacy.

    Not something Trump is accused of, generally.
    Shouldn't it be QANGO or QuANGO then?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112
    RobD said:

    https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1900148728243122565

    It's very weird watching Labour just actually do so many of the things Tories whined privately that they couldn't.

    Huh, didn't the Tories set up NHS England to put some distance between central government and decision making within the NHS?
    Yes, a good example of Cameron being continuity New Labour.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,755
    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    There's a similar, but Tolkien, thing with Peter Thiel's (the one who created JD Vance, who believes and has argued for autocracy over democracy) companies:

    Palantir Technologies
    Valar Ventures
    Mithril Capital Management
    Rivendell One LLC
    Lembas LLC
    Anduril Industries

    Some may recognise Palantir. When Thiel invested in a company setting up JD Vance, it was called Narya Capital - which is also Tolkien (Gandalf's Ring of Power).

    One concerning thing about Thiel is that he has compared the current USA system to the Weimar Republic.

    Both the US Marine Corp ($640m) and the UK (£30m via the International Fund for Ukraine) have signed deals with Anduril Industries in the last week - just to show how well the guy is engaged with government.
    ...and the NHS paid Palantir to handle their data. Labour signed that contract, btw. 👿
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,316
    Foxy said:

    Whether you think the boxer is a woman or a man surely if she wishes to be called she, constantly calling her a he just seems rude.

    If I wanted to be called "white", does that make me white?
    First you have to develop a liking for Steak and Kidney pie, washed down with a pint of bitter.

    It's required to live in character for 2 years before a change certificate can be granted.
    Shit - I am not a fan of kidney, so can no longer be considered white.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,316

    Blimey - I see Starmer has abolished the NHS in England...

    Oh wait - he's abolished NHS England!

    I am in the middle of teaching a class, many of whom are employed by NHS England. They are now somewhat distracted.
    As will many of my contacts in HEE...
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,210
    edited 11:58AM
    And yes, a good idea to reduce bureaucracy but as we were discussing this morning, you need to remove the reason for the bureaucracy in the first place.

    I can perhaps see how there might be some overlap in function/liaison activity between DfH and NHS England that will no longer be required, but that surely has to be a relatively small piece of its overall function. But a lot of what NHS England does will be mandated by legislation and how the NHS is currently constituted. In that sense, any reorganisation of the management needs to go hand in hand with institutional and legislative reform.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,189

    Tweet like Trump:

    https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1900141403067257316

    The Prime Minister wants to reduce the number of QUANGOs.

    Today we are abolishing the biggest QUANGO in the world.

    While also seeing NHS England workers go LD or Green I assume. Also just means more bureaucracy in the NHS or Dept of Health instead
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,956
    I think the dumber component of the Trump progeny may already be in the ‘hood, though it looks like the northern fiefdom.

    https://x.com/erictrump/status/1899183858399977874?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q

    The replies are funny, ragging on Eric for his Crypto advice, begging tweets or bots doing clunky Trump praise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,158
    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    There's a similar, but Tolkien, thing with Peter Thiel's (the one who created JD Vance, who believes and has argued for autocracy over democracy) companies:

    Palantir Technologies
    Valar Ventures
    Mithril Capital Management
    Rivendell One LLC
    Lembas LLC
    Anduril Industries

    Some may recognise Palantir. When Thiel invested in a company setting up JD Vance, it was called Narya Capital - which is also Tolkien (Gandalf's Ring of Power).

    One concerning thing about Thiel is that he has compared the current USA system to the Weimar Republic.

    Both the US Marine Corp ($640m) and the UK (£30m via the International Fund for Ukraine) have signed deals with Anduril Industries in the last week - just to show how well the guy is engaged with government.
    The NHS uses Palantir software.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,133
    Carnyx said:

    Foss said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    Grok means 'to understand'. It's a term that was taken from Heinlein and has been rattling around the tech (and US tech) culture since at least the 70s.
    That was cultural misappropriation (to use an anachronism) [edit]. It was the hippies who used it in the days of the flower power counterculture movement. 1960s.

    (No idea what Mr Heinlein thought of that.)
    Actually the other way round. Stranger in a Strange Land was published in 1961 - before the emergence of the hippies (in spite of what you might be led to believe by Oddball in Kelly's Heroes :) )
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,189
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    They do when the only outstanding state primary or secondary school in their area is a C of E or Roman Catholic school.

    Then you get parents queuing round the block to get into the church congregation on a Sunday for the months leading up to the decision on who gets places so they can get the Vicar's reference
    That's 'they have to put up with it' rather than 'want it', on your own testimony.
    No they want it as it offers choice from the bog standard comp or academy down the road
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,823
    edited 12:02PM
    viewcode said:

    Morning PB.

    The latest Trump/Thiel plan seems to be eliminate all taxes for anyone earning less than 150,000 dollars a year, and then to replace the lost income with tariffs.

    Unstupid question: would that work? I don't mean is it a good idea or a bad idea, I mean is it feasible? Would the sums add up?

    No.

    Do you remember all those people saying "if we just imposed a 1% tax on all share transactions, we could fund everything". It was a big cause celebre in left wing circles post the GFC. And it was, of course, rubbish because it assumed that volumes of share trading would remain the same after the imposition of the tax.

    There is the same issue here.

    Because if you impose swingeing (say 100%) taxes on imports, then you have a lot less imports*...

    And if you have a lot less imports, then you don't have a lot of imports to tax.

    So, like with the Tobin tax, it's based on the idea that there is no elasticity involved.

    * You might think the "lot less imports" would mean that you would be doing a lot better. But that is by no means clear either: all those industries you have that rely on components from abroad, for example, would be utterly decimated.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,855
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Musk is a fan of the "Culture Series", a book sequence written by the Scottish socialist and trade union admirer Iain M Banks, which depicts a post-scarcity society where sex changes are unremarkable, all people have enough of everything, money is irrelevant, but the drones are heavily armed and secretly run the society. Guess which lesson he took from it... 🤔
    One thing I think people haven't picked up is that Musk is much less intellectually coherent than Thiel, certainly not enough to mastermind
    a movement, apparently like him.

    They've had a constantly up and down relationship, and fell out badly for a while at PayPal, where Thiel thought he was much to much of a sloppy risk-taker, and not enough a thinker, like him.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,856

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    "Grok" originates from Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land, doesn't it?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,133
    HYUFD said:

    Tweet like Trump:

    https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/1900141403067257316

    The Prime Minister wants to reduce the number of QUANGOs.

    Today we are abolishing the biggest QUANGO in the world.

    While also seeing NHS England workers go LD or Green I assume. Also just means more bureaucracy in the NHS or Dept of Health instead
    There was and is a large aount of overlap and repetition between NHS England and the DoH. And even if it saves very few jobs it is still the right thing to do to make the DoH responsible for decisions rather than pushing them off to a third party.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,189
    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    I haven't got current stats on that, though I note that Church of England school still seem insanely popular.

    Birbalsingh has an interesting non-stereotyped collection of views and practices, that seem to be to be experience not dogma.

    based.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Birbalsingh

    Her blog is still up giving the flavour of her thinking. Although I'm sure most of it has gone unless you go looking at archive.org. The last post in 2019 was how they encourage pupils to wean themselves off mobile phone dependence.

    https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.com/
    We sent our children to a CofE infants school, although it seemed to have very limited religious content other than being next to a church and if it did we would have had a problem with it as we are both atheists. There were no religious entry requirements.

    We sent our children there because it was good, not for religious reasons.

    I don't know how normal this is.
    Very normal, C of E schools are more likely to be rated Outstanding than the average state school and for secondary school entry you have zero chance of entrance to an oversubscribed Outstanding C of E state school without proof of regular church attendance
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    I haven't got current stats on that, though I note that Church of England school still seem insanely popular.

    Birbalsingh has an interesting non-stereotyped collection of views and practices, that seem to be to be experience not dogma.

    based.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Birbalsingh

    Her blog is still up giving the flavour of her thinking. Although I'm sure most of it has gone unless you go looking at archive.org. The last post in 2019 was how they encourage pupils to wean themselves off mobile phone dependence.

    https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.com/
    We sent our children to a CofE infants school, although it seemed to have very limited religious content other than being next to a church and if it did we would have had a problem with it as we are both atheists. There were no religious entry requirements.

    We sent our children there because it was good, not for religious reasons.

    I don't know how normal this is.
    Very normal, C of E schools are more likely to be rated Outstanding than the average state school and for secondary school entry you have zero chance of entrance to an oversubscribed Outstanding C of E state school without proof of regular church attendance
    True, though worth also noting that CofE primary schools are disproportionately small and rural - village schools - which disproportionately have lower numbers of problem pupils and lower class sizes. Both of which tend to lead to good outcomes.
    Where I am, in a suburb, the CofE school tends to do less well - these advantages no longer exist. Also - because it isn't the only school in the area, it has a religious requirement to join, and the syllabus is more religious in nature - which naturally eats into the teaching time. So it does less well than other schools in the area.

    That's just primary schools - I've never come across a CofE secondary school (I'm not doubting they exist, just that I can't think of any around here - all the religious schools are Catholic, of which there are an astonishing number in Greater Manchester, and they are all very religious and not that good academically.)


    The only Outstanding rated secondary school in Epping Forest is a C of E school.

    ' ..using the GCSE Attainment 8 measure, faith schools scored 49.0% and non-faiths scored 46.2%. '

    https://www.goodschoolsguide.co.uk/choosing-a-school/state-schools/faith-schools-in-the-uk
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,133
    Nigelb said:

    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    There's a similar, but Tolkien, thing with Peter Thiel's (the one who created JD Vance, who believes and has argued for autocracy over democracy) companies:

    Palantir Technologies
    Valar Ventures
    Mithril Capital Management
    Rivendell One LLC
    Lembas LLC
    Anduril Industries

    Some may recognise Palantir. When Thiel invested in a company setting up JD Vance, it was called Narya Capital - which is also Tolkien (Gandalf's Ring of Power).

    One concerning thing about Thiel is that he has compared the current USA system to the Weimar Republic.

    Both the US Marine Corp ($640m) and the UK (£30m via the International Fund for Ukraine) have signed deals with Anduril Industries in the last week - just to show how well the guy is engaged with government.
    The NHS uses Palantir software.
    With a direct line to Sauron?
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,855

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    "Grok" originates from Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land, doesn't it?
    Yup, as discussed below, a bit. It also seemingly became accepted hippy
    word, too. From just slightly before my time, it seems.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,724
    MaxPB said:

    @bondegezou taking another L today with the government abolishing NHS management and bureaucracy after his protestations for months that it is impossible and we need more admin staff in the NHS and more managers to suck the blood out of it.

    Obviously you're delighted, but I can't see how abolishing NHS England removes the need for its various functions. Be interesting if they can actually reduce overall headcount.

    What I'm confused about is who is actually doing Public Health in England now? That's by far the most important thing the NHS needs to fix in terms of obesity, diabetes etc.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,210
    edited 12:06PM

    https://x.com/rcolvile/status/1900148728243122565

    It's very weird watching Labour just actually do so many of the things Tories whined privately that they couldn't.

    As time goes by it’s clear the Tories were hit with a kind of depressed inertia after Johnson and Truss. They lost their mojo and their appetite to govern. It was essentially a very long period of packing up shop. A very peculiar time politically.
    To be fair - if Sunak had tried to abolish NHS England, Starmer would have been supporting the resulting NHS national strike.
    Well, yes. But Starmer has discovered a belief in many things over the past year that was curiously lacking when he was criticising all and sundry in opposition.

    Opportunistic? Yes, but then all incoming governments are to a degree. I think more people perceive this in both he and Reeves because of the way they behaved in opposition and the ming vase strategy, and this is feeding a lot of negative perception. But I also agree with others on here that they will likely eventually be judged by results.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,677
    edited 12:11PM
    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    I haven't got current stats on that, though I note that Church of England school still seem insanely popular.

    Birbalsingh has an interesting non-stereotyped collection of views and practices, that seem to be to be experience not dogma.

    based.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Birbalsingh

    Her blog is still up giving the flavour of her thinking. Although I'm sure most of it has gone unless you go looking at archive.org. The last post in 2019 was how they encourage pupils to wean themselves off mobile phone dependence.

    https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.com/
    We sent our children to a CofE infants school, although it seemed to have very limited religious content other than being next to a church and if it did we would have had a problem with it as we are both atheists. There were no religious entry requirements.

    We sent our children there because it was good, not for religious reasons.

    I don't know how normal this is.
    Very normal, C of E schools are more likely to be rated Outstanding than the average state school and for secondary school entry you have zero chance of entrance to an oversubscribed Outstanding C of E state school without proof of regular church attendance
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Off topic

    Listening to Birbelsingh on Nick Ferrari. This woman is out of control. I recommend anyone with interest in schools policy to listen to this on Global Player. I was shocked. Those of a more conservative point of view will be cheered.

    She's flavour of the month with the Christian Nationalists because she banned prayer rituals in school policy (no religious groups such as a Christian Union) then won a court case defending it against a challenge by Muslim pupil. I'll have a listen to Nick Ferrari. As far as I have tracked her, she seems consistent since her first speech to the Conservative Party conference 15 or 16 years ago when she was identified; I'm not sure of the process by which she was identified as Miss Snuffy.

    (Religion in Public Life has been an area of interest of mine for decades, as you know.)

    That lets the CNats (and GBNews etc) pretend that it's about Muslims, and reflects desire to stir things up, when it was more like a victory for "secular" school cultures excluding religion, which is one groups like the National Secular Society have been on for decades. @BartholomewRoberts may be more up to date than me on that side of it.

    Here's GBNews framing it as about Muslims immigrants imposing things on "our" society, and Birbalsingh giving sensible replies arguing that practical multiculturalism requires no religious practice in her school:
    https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/prayer-ban-ruling-huge-victory-common-sense-patrick-christys

    It was a somewhat complex argument, because iirc it was about prayer ritual in the playground as effectively a form of protest when her school refused to provide a prayer room for pupils.

    The self-described "freedom of XYZ" groups take the other side than they do on "silent prayer" (ie intimidation and interference) outside abortion clinics - for some reason :neutral: .
    It’s interesting to see the reactions.

    @Mexicanpete is shocked because it seems like restricting the *requirements* of a minority.

    The GBNews take it as anti-Muslim.

    Most people don’t want more religion in our schools - even the weak-tea-and-biscuits form of Christianity.
    I haven't got current stats on that, though I note that Church of England school still seem insanely popular.

    Birbalsingh has an interesting non-stereotyped collection of views and practices, that seem to be to be experience not dogma.

    based.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Birbalsingh

    Her blog is still up giving the flavour of her thinking. Although I'm sure most of it has gone unless you go looking at archive.org. The last post in 2019 was how they encourage pupils to wean themselves off mobile phone dependence.

    https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.com/
    We sent our children to a CofE infants school, although it seemed to have very limited religious content other than being next to a church and if it did we would have had a problem with it as we are both atheists. There were no religious entry requirements.

    We sent our children there because it was good, not for religious reasons.

    I don't know how normal this is.
    Very normal, C of E schools are more likely to be rated Outstanding than the average state school and for secondary school entry you have zero chance of entrance to an oversubscribed Outstanding C of E state school without proof of regular church attendance
    True, though worth also noting that CofE primary schools are disproportionately small and rural - village schools - which disproportionately have lower numbers of problem pupils and lower class sizes. Both of which tend to lead to good outcomes.
    Where I am, in a suburb, the CofE school tends to do less well - these advantages no longer exist. Also - because it isn't the only school in the area, it has a religious requirement to join, and the syllabus is more religious in nature - which naturally eats into the teaching time. So it does less well than other schools in the area.

    That's just primary schools - I've never come across a CofE secondary school (I'm not doubting they exist, just that I can't think of any around here - all the religious schools are Catholic, of which there are an astonishing number in Greater Manchester, and they are all very religious and not that good academically.)
    Nationally there are around 230 Church of England secondary schools (1 in 16), which is an average of ~5 per Diocese. But variation is the rule. Manchester is a large diocese with ~190 Church of England schools in an area with a population of 2.2 million. I can't find a number for secondaries.

    My own area, the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham covers as near as dammit Notts/Nottingham, and has a population of 1.15 million, with around 70 CofE schools, of which 8 are secondaries.

    For Roman Catholics they traditionally see the focus of life as the trinity of Home / School / Church.

    For CofE school entrance requirements, I've seen very varied policies. The emphasis in guidance seems to be on open to local, looked after, sibling in the school, special needs, ahead of religious affiliation, with criteria applying more where oversubscription applies. But I'm not sure how that works in practice, especially in Sharpelbowsville.

    Others here I am sure are School Governors and can speak to this better.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112
    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Morning PB.

    The latest Trump/Thiel plan seems to be eliminate all taxes for anyone earning less than 150,000 dollars a year, and then to replace the lost income with tariffs.

    Unstupid question: would that work? I don't mean is it a good idea or a bad idea, I mean is it feasible? Would the sums add up?

    No.

    Do you remember all those people saying "if we just imposed a 1% tax on all share transactions, we could fund everything". It was a big cause celebre in left wing circles post the GFC. And it was, of course, rubbish because it assumed that volumes of share trading would remain the same after the imposition of the tax.

    There is the same issue here.

    Because if you impose swingeing (say 100%) taxes on imports, then you have a lot less imports*...

    And if you have a lot less imports, then you don't have a lot of imports to tax.

    So, like with the Tobin tax, it's based on the idea that there is no elasticity involved.

    * You might think the "lot less imports" would mean that you would be doing a lot better. But that is by no means clear either: all those industries you have that rely on components from abroad, for example, would be utterly decimated.
    But if you have a more reasonable rate (say 25%), then the economy just rebalances around that new reality. It's a structural change, not a magic money tree.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,112
    https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1900154929177911410

    The European Union, one of the most hostile and abusive taxing and tariffing authorities in the World, which was formed for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the United States, has just put a nasty 50% Tariff on Whisky. If this Tariff is not removed immediately, the U.S. will shortly place a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS COMING OUT OF FRANCE AND OTHER E.U. REPRESENTED COUNTRIES. This will be great for the Wine and Champagne businesses in the U.S.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,400
    Eabhal said:

    MaxPB said:

    @bondegezou taking another L today with the government abolishing NHS management and bureaucracy after his protestations for months that it is impossible and we need more admin staff in the NHS and more managers to suck the blood out of it.

    Obviously you're delighted, but I can't see how abolishing NHS England removes the need for its various functions. Be interesting if they can actually reduce overall headcount.

    What I'm confused about is who is actually doing Public Health in England now? That's by far the most important thing the NHS needs to fix in terms of obesity, diabetes etc.
    Public Health was shifted to the Councils under the last government.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,158
    Foss said:

    Carnyx said:

    Foss said:

    viewcode said:

    Comment on the latest Zeihan: "...We have gone from a civilization that wanted to be Star Trek to a civilisation that wants to be Game of Thrones..."

    Or more specifically Dungeons and Dragons, which Musk and Thiel grew up on. I've always thought "Grok" is exactly the sort of name that a 1980s computer geek of this vintage and influences, would probably come up with.

    You obviously haven’t read Stranger in A Strange Land. Then again, Musk missed the entire point of the book.
    Aha, I see thar you're right and that Grok is a character in the sci-fi novel there.

    The Mars theme is in there, again.
    Grok means 'to understand'. It's a term that was taken from Heinlein and has been rattling around the tech (and US tech) culture since at least the 70s.
    That was cultural misappropriation (to use an anachronism) [edit]. It was the hippies who used it in the days of the flower power counterculture movement. 1960s.

    (No idea what Mr Heinlein thought of that.)
    Given the nature of California at that point, I suspect there was a reasonable overlap between the tech/hippy/scifi/academic communities.
    There was overlap, but it certainly wasn't total.
    The conformist and conservative were also extremely well represented in tech. And there were plenty of conservatives in sci-fi.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,759
    Good afternoon

    Lib dem correct on saying no amount of change can be effective without social care, which the government has put on hold and despite suggesting cross party talks nothing has happened

    It simply is too difficult apparently but it just cannot be avoided
  • eekeek Posts: 29,394

    https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1900154929177911410

    The European Union, one of the most hostile and abusive taxing and tariffing authorities in the World, which was formed for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the United States, has just put a nasty 50% Tariff on Whisky. If this Tariff is not removed immediately, the U.S. will shortly place a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS COMING OUT OF FRANCE AND OTHER E.U. REPRESENTED COUNTRIES. This will be great for the Wine and Champagne businesses in the U.S.

    Popcorn all round - apart from the whisky industry
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,658

    https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1900154929177911410

    The European Union, one of the most hostile and abusive taxing and tariffing authorities in the World, which was formed for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the United States, has just put a nasty 50% Tariff on Whisky. If this Tariff is not removed immediately, the U.S. will shortly place a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS COMING OUT OF FRANCE AND OTHER E.U. REPRESENTED COUNTRIES. This will be great for the Wine and Champagne businesses in the U.S.

    Don's up early today...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,823

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Morning PB.

    The latest Trump/Thiel plan seems to be eliminate all taxes for anyone earning less than 150,000 dollars a year, and then to replace the lost income with tariffs.

    Unstupid question: would that work? I don't mean is it a good idea or a bad idea, I mean is it feasible? Would the sums add up?

    No.

    Do you remember all those people saying "if we just imposed a 1% tax on all share transactions, we could fund everything". It was a big cause celebre in left wing circles post the GFC. And it was, of course, rubbish because it assumed that volumes of share trading would remain the same after the imposition of the tax.

    There is the same issue here.

    Because if you impose swingeing (say 100%) taxes on imports, then you have a lot less imports*...

    And if you have a lot less imports, then you don't have a lot of imports to tax.

    So, like with the Tobin tax, it's based on the idea that there is no elasticity involved.

    * You might think the "lot less imports" would mean that you would be doing a lot better. But that is by no means clear either: all those industries you have that rely on components from abroad, for example, would be utterly decimated.
    But if you have a more reasonable rate (say 25%), then the economy just rebalances around that new reality. It's a structural change, not a magic money tree.
    The question is whether you can replace income tax on all people with incomes below $150,000 with tariffs.

    And the answer is no, because a 25% tariff wouldn't raise enough money, unless US government spending was absolutely slashed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,158

    https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1900154929177911410

    The European Union, one of the most hostile and abusive taxing and tariffing authorities in the World, which was formed for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the United States, has just put a nasty 50% Tariff on Whisky. If this Tariff is not removed immediately, the U.S. will shortly place a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS COMING OUT OF FRANCE AND OTHER E.U. REPRESENTED COUNTRIES. This will be great for the Wine and Champagne businesses in the U.S.

    The thin skinned narcissist is there in every tweet.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,646
    eek said:

    https://x.com/trump_repost/status/1900154929177911410

    The European Union, one of the most hostile and abusive taxing and tariffing authorities in the World, which was formed for the sole purpose of taking advantage of the United States, has just put a nasty 50% Tariff on Whisky. If this Tariff is not removed immediately, the U.S. will shortly place a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS COMING OUT OF FRANCE AND OTHER E.U. REPRESENTED COUNTRIES. This will be great for the Wine and Champagne businesses in the U.S.

    Popcorn all round - apart from the whisky industry
    The Champagne businesses of America?

    Hmmm...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,181
    MaxPB said:

    @bondegezou taking another L today with the government abolishing NHS management and bureaucracy after his protestations for months that it is impossible and we need more admin staff in the NHS and more managers to suck the blood out of it.

    It's pretty hypocritical, but there are no prizes for originality in politics. If Labour take on the state, good for them. We have heard about 'a bonfire of the quangos' before however.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,677
    edited 12:15PM
    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Morning PB.

    The latest Trump/Thiel plan seems to be eliminate all taxes for anyone earning less than 150,000 dollars a year, and then to replace the lost income with tariffs.

    Unstupid question: would that work? I don't mean is it a good idea or a bad idea, I mean is it feasible? Would the sums add up?

    No.

    Do you remember all those people saying "if we just imposed a 1% tax on all share transactions, we could fund everything". It was a big cause celebre in left wing circles post the GFC. And it was, of course, rubbish because it assumed that volumes of share trading would remain the same after the imposition of the tax.

    There is the same issue here.

    Because if you impose swingeing (say 100%) taxes on imports, then you have a lot less imports*...

    And if you have a lot less imports, then you don't have a lot of imports to tax.

    So, like with the Tobin tax, it's based on the idea that there is no elasticity involved.

    * You might think the "lot less imports" would mean that you would be doing a lot better. But that is by no means clear either: all those industries you have that rely on components from abroad, for example, would be utterly decimated.
    Indeedy-doody.

    Noisily promoted fashionable lefty cause celebres tend to specialise in being bollocks.

    Others (usually the less fashionable) are not, however.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,724
    edited 12:15PM
    MaxPB said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    Today is the vote in the Bundestag on reforming the debt brake. It's still unclear if it will get the 2 thirds majority needed.

    If the Russians agree to the ceasefire Ukraine has accepted it may not be needed for the moment anyway
    Nonsense
    Putin has said he won't even accept European and NATO peacekeepers, it would likely be Turkish, Brazilian, Indian troops etc enforcing any ceasefire.

    It would just be future deterrence NATO nations needed to increase their militaries for
    Sorry to be picky but Turkey is in NATO so you could have Australian or New Zealand troops I suppose though I agree more likely are Brazilians, Nigerians or Indians. To be honest, if someone else is paying for them (who?), I imagine some countries would be happy to have their soldiers billeted somewhere else at someone else's expense.
    Putin gets on with Erdogan so would probably accept Turkish troops, the Russians already rejected Australian involvement

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/10/russia-warns-australia-deploying-peacekeeping-troops-to-ukraine-would-lead-to-grave-consequences
    It is time that the Russians are told to FUCK OFF over what they will and won't accept. The suggestion that they should be able to veto who is president and what nationality of troops are allowed in a sovereign country is beyond outrageous. Every concession is a reward for their aggression. Europe needs to keep all sanctions in place and continue to isolate Russia where possible. More appeasement only encourages the aggressor.
    It seems to me the only way Trump can force a quick end to the war that isn't a clear win for Russia is to threaten Putin with a continuation (or even escalation) of US military support for Ukraine if he doesn't make big meaningful concessions. However he can't threaten this with any credibility because he's already made it clear he isn't prepared to stay involved militarily. "You make a deal or we're out" he said to Zelensky in the WH, and for once I think he was speaking the truth. That is his position.

    So otoh he wants to get his big moment and live up to his self-image as the great dealmaker, but otoh he can't and won't force Russia to back down from its red lines (being they keep what they've taken and Ukraine gets no Art 5 type protection on the rest). Any deal would therefore be mainly on Russia's terms and can happen only if Ukraine feels forced to sign it due to having no realistic alternative. I think that's what this boils down to now. Will Europe's offer allow Zelensky to genuinely feel that no deal is better than a bad deal?
    I think this a pretty good summary of where we are. It's why Europe building up its own military strength is so important, £6bn being cut from benefits should be just the start. Outsourcing our security to America means we have to live with the politics of America, I think a few cuts to the welfare state is a small price to end our obsession with the USA.
    We could pop taxes up to French levels, spend 9% of GDP on defence and have military expenditure 3x as high as Russia. The funniest thing about this debate is the rather blatant attempts to shoehorn personal political obsessions into the debate.

    My version of this is put fuel duty up to where it should be without the incessant freezes since 2010. That gets you 0.8 per cent of GDP while primarily taxing higher income people, who drive 3x as much as poorer people. And it pushes people off an OPEC controlled commodity onto EVs. Easy. Next.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,158

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Morning PB.

    The latest Trump/Thiel plan seems to be eliminate all taxes for anyone earning less than 150,000 dollars a year, and then to replace the lost income with tariffs.

    Unstupid question: would that work? I don't mean is it a good idea or a bad idea, I mean is it feasible? Would the sums add up?

    No.

    Do you remember all those people saying "if we just imposed a 1% tax on all share transactions, we could fund everything". It was a big cause celebre in left wing circles post the GFC. And it was, of course, rubbish because it assumed that volumes of share trading would remain the same after the imposition of the tax.

    There is the same issue here.

    Because if you impose swingeing (say 100%) taxes on imports, then you have a lot less imports*...

    And if you have a lot less imports, then you don't have a lot of imports to tax.

    So, like with the Tobin tax, it's based on the idea that there is no elasticity involved.

    * You might think the "lot less imports" would mean that you would be doing a lot better. But that is by no means clear either: all those industries you have that rely on components from abroad, for example, would be utterly decimated.
    But if you have a more reasonable rate (say 25%), then the economy just rebalances around that new reality. It's a structural change, not a magic money tree.
    On your industrial raw material imports ?
    Good luck with that.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,823
    The rest of the world really should just ignore Trump's tariffs gyrations: they do far more damage to the US economy than to other countries.
Sign In or Register to comment.