One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will.
But nobody should be under any illusion that Trump and those around him are potential internal and expansionist dictators but for the US Constitution, which the Founding Fathers created in a way to specifically stop the US ever being governed by a dictator (whether that makes them "fascist" - A word that's banded around too much, IMO, I'm not sure)
In the next four years, we'll find out how robust that Constitution envisioned by the Washington, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson is... It contained Trump rather well from 2016 to 2020 but I think he is determined to push things much, much further in his second term... So we'll see...
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will.
But nobody should be under any illusion that Trump and those around him are potential internal and expansionist dictators but for the US Constitution, which the Founding Fathers created in a way to specifically stop the US ever being governed by a dictator (whether that makes them "fascist - A word that's banded around too much, IMO, I'm not sure)
In the next four years, we'll find out how robust that Constitution envisioned by the Washington, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson is... It contained Trump rather well from 2016 to 2020 but I think he is determined to push things much, much further in his second term... So we'll see...
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will.
But nobody should be under any illusion that Trump and those around him are potential internal and expansionist dictators but for the US Constitution, which the Founding Fathers created in a way to specifically stop the US ever being governed by a dictator (whether that makes them "fascist - A word that's banded around too much, IMO, I'm not sure)
In the next four years, we'll find out how robust that Constitution envisioned by the Washington, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson is... It contained Trump rather well from 2016 to 2020 but I think he is determined to push things much, much further in his second term... So we'll see...
PBers do not understand how SHAMED we are, in the eyes of the world, especially the eyes of the American Right
Well. As far as I can see, we're on the right side of history and America (and especially the American Right) are just a bunch of cheese-burger eating surrender monkeys.
You don’t understand. And we’re not allowed to talk about it
We have our own internal (and external) problems, as do all countries. Although why the cheese-eating, surrender monkey US right are taking such an interest in UK internal affairs, is another matter?
But... We have always had a (generally) tolerant history of race relations and inclusion. We should be proud of our history and heritage since the abolition of the slave trade, especially set against American history of Ku-Klux-Klan, segregation, lynchings, etc...
I have been thinking deeply about this slither of headroom the government has for balancing the budget, and frankly I don’t believe it.
Highest taxes ever in coming years, and massive public spending plans announced before Christmas - this slither of headroom only exists under the governments rules, should we go along with it?
I think they decided these rules and what to prune years ago. The rules create this impression that things are tight something has to be pruned - but different rules like halve the public spending committed to, or not pay more than 2% gdp on defence, and there’s room for generous tax cuts, not this fabricated impression of slither of nothing to play with so pruning must happen. Raise a tax rather than prune is the other way to go. You can argue 2.5% defence spending is needed, or public service investment is needed, or direct taxes must not go up, but you can’t argue we can have a completely different set of government priorities and rules than these, of course we can.
I think all the newspapers and commentators are mugs. Absolutely everything I have watched and read today accepts the fiscal rules this government has merely invented to support what it wants to do, like accepting the architects design of the matrix not understanding it doesn’t have to be like that.
The government has every newspaper and TV economic commentator living in the matrix, not the real world. Embarrassing.
PBers do not understand how SHAMED we are, in the eyes of the world, especially the eyes of the American Right
Well. As far as I can see, we're on the right side of history and America (and especially the American Right) are just a bunch of cheese-burger eating surrender monkeys.
You don’t understand. And we’re not allowed to talk about it
We have our own internal (and external) problems, as do all countries. Although why the cheese-eating, surrender monkey US right are taking such an interest in UK internal affairs, is another matter?
But... We have always had a (generally) tolerant history of race relations and inclusion. We should be proud of our history and heritage since the abolition of the slave trade, especially set against American history of Ku-Klux-Klan, segregation, lynchings, etc...
They despise us. And they are right to do so
We despise them and are right to do so. They are some of the most evil and stupid people on the planet.
PBers do not understand how SHAMED we are, in the eyes of the world, especially the eyes of the American Right
Well. As far as I can see, we're on the right side of history and America (and especially the American Right) are just a bunch of cheese-burger eating surrender monkeys.
You don’t understand. And we’re not allowed to talk about it
We have our own internal (and external) problems, as do all countries. Although why the cheese-eating, surrender monkey US right are taking such an interest in UK internal affairs, is another matter?
But... We have always had a (generally) tolerant history of race relations and inclusion. We should be proud of our history and heritage since the abolition of the slave trade, especially set against American history of Ku-Klux-Klan, segregation, lynchings, etc...
They despise us. And they are right to do so
We despise them and are right to do so. They are some of the most evil and stupid people on the planet.
And like our Leon, they can’t tell the difference between intelligence and ignorance.
PBers do not understand how SHAMED we are, in the eyes of the world, especially the eyes of the American Right
Well. As far as I can see, we're on the right side of history and America (and especially the American Right) are just a bunch of cheese-burger eating surrender monkeys.
You don’t understand. And we’re not allowed to talk about it
We have our own internal (and external) problems, as do all countries. Although why the cheese-eating, surrender monkey US right are taking such an interest in UK internal affairs, is another matter?
But... We have always had a (generally) tolerant history of race relations and inclusion. We should be proud of our history and heritage since the abolition of the slave trade, especially set against American history of Ku-Klux-Klan, segregation, lynchings, etc...
They despise us. And they are right to do so
God you are the most miserable Britain hater out there. Just stay in Uruguay if it’s so bad here
@Leon is a typical plastic patriot. He pretends to love this country, but seems to prefer being anywhere but in Britain.
Some notes from the Telegraph's obituary of Mrs Thatcher's former wossname:-
Sir Julian Seymour, skilled head of Margaret Thatcher’s private office after she left Downing Street ... Leaving office precipitately in November 1990, Mrs Thatcher had, according to Seymour, “no money – and I mean no money – in her bank account”. She had no income outside politics, and a prime minister’s pension of just £25,000 a year. Though her husband Denis was comfortably off, he had never paid for any aspect of her public life, and “never voluntarily put his hand in his pocket”.
Mrs Thatcher was also shocked, upset and disorientated. For 11 years as prime minister she had been working flat out, with her life organised by civil servants in her private office and a small personal staff. The Thatchers had bought a quite unsuitable house in Dulwich and needed somewhere sensible to live. Thousands of letters from the public piled up unanswered in borrowed offices; she had almost forgotten how to dial people direct.
... She spent much of her time raising money for the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, despite being “bored sideways” with it. Mark Thatcher had set it up without observing the legal niceties, and in July 1991, just before Seymour took charge, the Charity Commission refused it charitable status on the grounds that its work was political.
... Mark saw it as a vehicle for getting the world’s wealthy to “pay up for Mumsy”. Once Seymour had diplomatically taken charge, potential contributors were wooed back.
... When Major gave a dinner for her 70th birthday at No 10 the following year, the invitations went out without it having been decided who was paying. After an uncomfortable call from the prime minister’s office, Seymour said he would personally pay the bill until something was sorted out. It never was; in 2019 he said: “I have happily written off my £7,000.”
... At the handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997, Seymour noticed that she seemed “a bit wandery”. He put it down to exhaustion, but later came to see it as an early symptom of mental decline.
In 2018, when Major went public with the view that she had shown symptoms of this even in office, Seymour and Worthington wrote to The Daily Telegraph disagreeing. At the time she left Downing Street, they said, she had not been “ill” but distraught. Only later did she suffer memory loss.
Major said the “sniping” from her during his first days in office “didn’t sound to me like the Margaret I had come to know”. The belief that she was ill had made it easier for him to bear the criticism, “though it was still uncomfortable”.
Stockpile 72 hours of supplies in case of disaster or attack, EU tells citizens Bloc’s first preparedness strategy urges people to prepare for floods, fires, pandemics or military strikes
... Swedish authorities recommend keeping at home a good supply of water, energy-rich food, blankets and alternative heating, as well as investing in a battery-powered radio. Norway advises people to stock up on non-essential medicines, including iodine tablets in the case of a nuclear incident. German households have been urged to adapt their own cellars, garages or store rooms for use as bunkers, while housebuilders will be legally obliged to include safe shelters in new homes – as Poland has already done. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/26/stockpile-supplies-72-hours-disasters-attack-eu-tells-citizens
Fog in the Solent, just to let those of you on North Island know that you are currently cut off.
There was a magical atmosphere down the beach yesterday afternoon, with blue sky and warm sun above, yet a bank of sea fog just offshore with long wisps gently moving across the beach and into the town.
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will.
But nobody should be under any illusion that Trump and those around him are potential internal and expansionist dictators but for the US Constitution, which the Founding Fathers created in a way to specifically stop the US ever being governed by a dictator (whether that makes them "fascist" - A word that's banded around too much, IMO, I'm not sure)
In the next four years, we'll find out how robust that Constitution envisioned by the Washington, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson is... It contained Trump rather well from 2016 to 2020 but I think he is determined to push things much, much further in his second term... So we'll see...
Since when has he considered Russia a threat to Greenland, or indeed anywhere?
Two Russian 'black widows', an army warrant officer and his wife have been charged by the Russian authorities with recruiting vulnerable men into the army, contracting fake marriages, and seeking their deaths in order to obtain compensation payments to share between them. ⬇️
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Who among us has not pinched £15,000-worth of posh handbags because the McDonald's saver menu went up?
Isn't it mostly that the jails are full to bursting, hence a non custodial sentence?
I'm sure they could have squeezed him in somewhere for a week or two.
If we take the account of the Times' sister paper, the judge's reasoning is that this was a one-off (spread over six months) and the thief will not reoffend. After that it gets a bit silly because on the one hand the judge agrees it was due to the cost-of-living crisis, but on the other hand she orders him to pay £11,000 compensation. So is he skint or isn't he? https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/34077713/harrods-worker-jails-cost-living/
@Leon The US right are so despicable that I should not worry about their low opinion.
Nobody is 'worried' about the insults of a rude US senator. What we should be 'worried' about is our own country and the rate at which it's currently circling the u-bend.
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
@Andy_JS as with many instances of Trumpism I just don't think there is that much to understand. This is reality TV for him.
IMO: There is probably some vague thoughts about securing natural resources but far, far more prominent in his mind is that he heard some talking head talking about how they should be part of USA and impulsively decided to pursue it.
I think it is a mistake to ascribe much strategic thought to his actions; the only reason some of his actions have achieved strategic success in the past couple of months is because of the USA's superpower status, so others are rightly reluctant to call out the nonsensensical stances for what they are.
Frankly, I thought they could have been a lot worse.
Although I suspect they are reserved for the autumn, when she comes back to raise taxes...
Crude abuse from the Tory press is one thing but traditionally friendly papers accusing the Chancellor of making savings ‘on the backs of the poor’ will be harder to stomach.
During my daily listen to Farming Today they played a clip of Mel Stride attacking Reeves yesterday about the IHT for Farms issue and that god awful thing happened where an MP makes a few points/statements and all the fucking idiots on the same side join in and say it at the same time like a bunch of primary school children .
When did this start (I know it’s been around for a while) and is there nobody the MPs will listen too who can say “you sound like a bunch of retards, it’s doesn’t win the argument, the public find it childish and embarrassing, please stop.”.
I could feel my insides turning and twisting with cringe.
During my daily listen to Farming Today they played a clip of Mel Stride attacking Reeves yesterday about the IHT for Farms issue and that god awful thing happened where an MP makes a few points/statements and all the fucking idiots on the same side join in and say it at the same time like a bunch of primary school children .
When did this start (I know it’s been around for a while) and is there nobody the MPs will listen too who can say “you sound like a bunch of retards, it’s doesn’t win the argument, the public find it childish and embarrassing, please stop.”.
I could feel my insides turning and twisting with cringe.
It won’t be long before we start seeing the US flag being burnt on European streets . Trump is turning the US into one of the most hated nations on earth .
I went to New York at the end of 2022. It was absolutely amazing. Me and my friend vowed we'd go back, but I wouldn't go back while Trump is POTUS.
Is that silly?
I think it's sensible.
US law enforcement has always been a bit arbitrary, but that has been way dialled up, particularly at the border. There appears to be total impunity, they can do anything, for no reason, and keep you locked up in degrading conditions indefinitely on a whim.
Why would you risk it?
Well I hadn't thought about that. I was thinking more about one person in little old Blighty taking a stand against the Putin loving, Orange One.
But now you mention it...
Meh, I think this is a bit over the top.
There are plenty of countries many people travel to regularly and happily with far more arbitrary law enforcement, both at the borders and within.
And we are vanishingly insignificant as individuals so don't stop going as a political stance imo.
I will probably avoid the USA as, apart from it's dropzones it has never got anywhere near the top of my list of long-haul destinations. But if I had a reason to make the trip (family etc) I'd do so, just with a few sensible precautions.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
It won’t be long before we start seeing the US flag being burnt on European streets . Trump is turning the US into one of the most hated nations on earth .
I went to New York at the end of 2022. It was absolutely amazing. Me and my friend vowed we'd go back, but I wouldn't go back while Trump is POTUS.
Is that silly?
I think it's sensible.
US law enforcement has always been a bit arbitrary, but that has been way dialled up, particularly at the border. There appears to be total impunity, they can do anything, for no reason, and keep you locked up in degrading conditions indefinitely on a whim.
Why would you risk it?
Well I hadn't thought about that. I was thinking more about one person in little old Blighty taking a stand against the Putin loving, Orange One.
But now you mention it...
Meh, I think this is a bit over the top.
There are plenty of countries many people travel to regularly and happily with far more arbitrary law enforcement, both at the borders and within.
And we are vanishingly insignificant as individuals so don't stop going as a political stance imo.
I will probably avoid the USA as, apart from it's dropzones it has never got anywhere near the top of my list of long-haul destinations. But if I had a reason to make the trip (family etc) I'd do so, just with a few sensible precautions.
Useful article on phones and Internet when visiting Trumpistan.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
It is not just about money, although it is a lot about money. Police are still feeling the impact of Theresa May's cuts which cleared out a lot of experienced officers, and recruiting even 20,000 new coppers will not replace that hard-won knowledge. Over-centralised specialist squads have further denuded local stations of talent.
There was a report just the other day that so-called counter-terror tactics (or in reality, simply prioritising offenders) had led to a large increase in arrests. And that is without the Prime Minister's favourite panacea, AI.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
Who cares? Farage is NOTA so his sums do not need to add up. It's like Brexit. Your life's turned to ashes; there's a scapegoat; vote vote vote for Nigel Farage! And why not? It is not as if the established parties have any better ideas.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
Reform live in a fantasy land. It is incredible to me. The tories and labour should be flagging reform policies and their actual effects every time the camera is on them, rather than trying to try emulate.
P.S. we need to get back in to the single market ASAP. 2/3 of the electorate want it. The vast majority of MPs want it. Why are we being held hostage to a political movement that belongs to the past. By 2029 brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age alone... that isn't taking into account the people who change their mind and the new young rejoiners crowding into the electorate in the other end of the system. Brexit is stone dead and the atlantic security pillar has dropped away. Let's move on.
It won’t be long before we start seeing the US flag being burnt on European streets . Trump is turning the US into one of the most hated nations on earth .
I went to New York at the end of 2022. It was absolutely amazing. Me and my friend vowed we'd go back, but I wouldn't go back while Trump is POTUS.
Is that silly?
I think it's sensible.
US law enforcement has always been a bit arbitrary, but that has been way dialled up, particularly at the border. There appears to be total impunity, they can do anything, for no reason, and keep you locked up in degrading conditions indefinitely on a whim.
Why would you risk it?
Well I hadn't thought about that. I was thinking more about one person in little old Blighty taking a stand against the Putin loving, Orange One.
But now you mention it...
Meh, I think this is a bit over the top.
There are plenty of countries many people travel to regularly and happily with far more arbitrary law enforcement, both at the borders and within.
And we are vanishingly insignificant as individuals so don't stop going as a political stance imo.
I will probably avoid the USA as, apart from it's dropzones it has never got anywhere near the top of my list of long-haul destinations. But if I had a reason to make the trip (family etc) I'd do so, just with a few sensible precautions.
Useful article on phones and Internet when visiting Trumpistan.
Nigh on all academics I know are cancelling the conference season in the states. I am track chair at an August conference. Cancelled. Furthermore, all the conferences in my field next year are moving to Europe or Asia. The main conference in my field usually alternates between the us and europe every other year. Next year america has been scrapped and it will be in Japan instead. The loss of income for airports, hotels, venues, caterers and domestic transport must be enormous. And here is the thing: I don't see that returning in the near to medium term. There has also been an uptick in American researchers applying to European schools. Wow.
But here is the thing. The US governments approach to curtailment of research topics means that US universities cannot meaningfully host international conferences without compromising their own funding. For instance, research focusing on women.... heads up women are just over half of the human population. You cannot restrict that as a research area and expect it to not impact its organisation.
Some notes from the Telegraph's obituary of Mrs Thatcher's former wossname:-
Sir Julian Seymour, skilled head of Margaret Thatcher’s private office after she left Downing Street ... Leaving office precipitately in November 1990, Mrs Thatcher had, according to Seymour, “no money – and I mean no money – in her bank account”. She had no income outside politics, and a prime minister’s pension of just £25,000 a year. Though her husband Denis was comfortably off, he had never paid for any aspect of her public life, and “never voluntarily put his hand in his pocket”.
Mrs Thatcher was also shocked, upset and disorientated. For 11 years as prime minister she had been working flat out, with her life organised by civil servants in her private office and a small personal staff. The Thatchers had bought a quite unsuitable house in Dulwich and needed somewhere sensible to live. Thousands of letters from the public piled up unanswered in borrowed offices; she had almost forgotten how to dial people direct.
... She spent much of her time raising money for the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, despite being “bored sideways” with it. Mark Thatcher had set it up without observing the legal niceties, and in July 1991, just before Seymour took charge, the Charity Commission refused it charitable status on the grounds that its work was political.
... Mark saw it as a vehicle for getting the world’s wealthy to “pay up for Mumsy”. Once Seymour had diplomatically taken charge, potential contributors were wooed back.
... When Major gave a dinner for her 70th birthday at No 10 the following year, the invitations went out without it having been decided who was paying. After an uncomfortable call from the prime minister’s office, Seymour said he would personally pay the bill until something was sorted out. It never was; in 2019 he said: “I have happily written off my £7,000.”
... At the handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997, Seymour noticed that she seemed “a bit wandery”. He put it down to exhaustion, but later came to see it as an early symptom of mental decline.
In 2018, when Major went public with the view that she had shown symptoms of this even in office, Seymour and Worthington wrote to The Daily Telegraph disagreeing. At the time she left Downing Street, they said, she had not been “ill” but distraught. Only later did she suffer memory loss.
Major said the “sniping” from her during his first days in office “didn’t sound to me like the Margaret I had come to know”. The belief that she was ill had made it easier for him to bear the criticism, “though it was still uncomfortable”.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
It's always about 'find the money' with anyone from the left. As if the state already does things with unquestionable efficiency and the only possible way to improve anything would be to hose taxpayers money at it. Even when we have evidence daily that this is laughably untrue.
It won’t be long before we start seeing the US flag being burnt on European streets . Trump is turning the US into one of the most hated nations on earth .
I went to New York at the end of 2022. It was absolutely amazing. Me and my friend vowed we'd go back, but I wouldn't go back while Trump is POTUS.
Is that silly?
I think it's sensible.
US law enforcement has always been a bit arbitrary, but that has been way dialled up, particularly at the border. There appears to be total impunity, they can do anything, for no reason, and keep you locked up in degrading conditions indefinitely on a whim.
Why would you risk it?
Well I hadn't thought about that. I was thinking more about one person in little old Blighty taking a stand against the Putin loving, Orange One.
But now you mention it...
Meh, I think this is a bit over the top.
There are plenty of countries many people travel to regularly and happily with far more arbitrary law enforcement, both at the borders and within.
And we are vanishingly insignificant as individuals so don't stop going as a political stance imo.
I will probably avoid the USA as, apart from it's dropzones it has never got anywhere near the top of my list of long-haul destinations. But if I had a reason to make the trip (family etc) I'd do so, just with a few sensible precautions.
Useful article on phones and Internet when visiting Trumpistan.
Nigh on all academics I know are cancelling the conference season in the states. I am track chair at an August conference. Cancelled. Furthermore, all the conferences in my field next year are moving to Europe or Asia. The main conference in my field usually alternates between the us and europe every other year. Next year america has been scrapped and it will be in Japan instead. The loss of income for airports, hotels, venues, caterers and domestic transport must be enormous. And here is the thing: I don't see that returning in the near to medium term. There has also been an uptick in American researchers applying to European schools. Wow.
But here is the thing. The US governments approach to curtailment of research topics means that US universities cannot meaningfully host international conferences without compromising their own funding. For instance, research focusing on women.... heads up women are just over half of the human population. You cannot restrict that as a research area and expect it to not impact its organisation.
Yes, I am only going as my flights etc are all booked and nonrefundable.
I haven't been to America in over a decade. It will be interesting to see the changes. I have visited a number of autocratic states over the years so will try to stay under the radar.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
It's always about 'find the money' with anyone from the left. As if the state already does things with unquestionable efficiency and the only possible way to improve anything would be to hose taxpayers money at it. Even when we have evidence daily that this is laughably untrue.
So where is he finding the money? There simply aren't that many diversity officers to fire.
Farage would be a terrible Prime Minister. Lazy, drunken and in hock to foreign powers that hate us.
Surprised Leon and Billy Glenn haven't spammed PB with this, given how keen they were to expose Biden going gaga.
Donald Trump: "We're gonna have tremendous goodies in the bag for women too. The women…Fertilization. I'm still very proud of it, I don't care. I'll be known as the fertilization president and that's okay."
Some notes from the Telegraph's obituary of Mrs Thatcher's former wossname:-
Sir Julian Seymour, skilled head of Margaret Thatcher’s private office after she left Downing Street ... Leaving office precipitately in November 1990, Mrs Thatcher had, according to Seymour, “no money – and I mean no money – in her bank account”. She had no income outside politics, and a prime minister’s pension of just £25,000 a year. Though her husband Denis was comfortably off, he had never paid for any aspect of her public life, and “never voluntarily put his hand in his pocket”.
Mrs Thatcher was also shocked, upset and disorientated. For 11 years as prime minister she had been working flat out, with her life organised by civil servants in her private office and a small personal staff. The Thatchers had bought a quite unsuitable house in Dulwich and needed somewhere sensible to live. Thousands of letters from the public piled up unanswered in borrowed offices; she had almost forgotten how to dial people direct.
... She spent much of her time raising money for the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, despite being “bored sideways” with it. Mark Thatcher had set it up without observing the legal niceties, and in July 1991, just before Seymour took charge, the Charity Commission refused it charitable status on the grounds that its work was political.
... Mark saw it as a vehicle for getting the world’s wealthy to “pay up for Mumsy”. Once Seymour had diplomatically taken charge, potential contributors were wooed back.
... When Major gave a dinner for her 70th birthday at No 10 the following year, the invitations went out without it having been decided who was paying. After an uncomfortable call from the prime minister’s office, Seymour said he would personally pay the bill until something was sorted out. It never was; in 2019 he said: “I have happily written off my £7,000.”
... At the handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997, Seymour noticed that she seemed “a bit wandery”. He put it down to exhaustion, but later came to see it as an early symptom of mental decline.
In 2018, when Major went public with the view that she had shown symptoms of this even in office, Seymour and Worthington wrote to The Daily Telegraph disagreeing. At the time she left Downing Street, they said, she had not been “ill” but distraught. Only later did she suffer memory loss.
Major said the “sniping” from her during his first days in office “didn’t sound to me like the Margaret I had come to know”. The belief that she was ill had made it easier for him to bear the criticism, “though it was still uncomfortable”.
Neil Kinnock also thought Mrs Thatcher was in mental decline during her premiership. I'd place more stock on those who had known Mrs Thatcher from the beginning than those like Seymour who met her only after she had left office.
On the question of who paid for her dinner, this points to a lack of basic administrative competence at the centre. Something we often think is new, but is at least decades old. Like the Thatcher Foundation being badly set up. Dominic Cummings has probably written a Substack post on it.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
Reform live in a fantasy land. It is incredible to me. The tories and labour should be flagging reform policies and their actual effects every time the camera is on them, rather than trying to try emulate.
P.S. we need to get back in to the single market ASAP. 2/3 of the electorate want it. The vast majority of MPs want it. Why are we being held hostage to a political movement that belongs to the past. By 2029 brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age alone... that isn't taking into account the people who change their mind and the new young rejoiners crowding into the electorate in the other end of the system. Brexit is stone dead and the atlantic security pillar has dropped away. Let's move on.
I think its more likely you'll be dead and were still out
I have been thinking deeply about this slither of headroom the government has for balancing the budget, and frankly I don’t believe it.
Highest taxes ever in coming years, and massive public spending plans announced before Christmas - this slither of headroom only exists under the governments rules, should we go along with it?
I think they decided these rules and what to prune years ago. The rules create this impression that things are tight something has to be pruned - but different rules like halve the public spending committed to, or not pay more than 2% gdp on defence, and there’s room for generous tax cuts, not this fabricated impression of slither of nothing to play with so pruning must happen. Raise a tax rather than prune is the other way to go. You can argue 2.5% defence spending is needed, or public service investment is needed, or direct taxes must not go up, but you can’t argue we can have a completely different set of government priorities and rules than these, of course we can.
I think all the newspapers and commentators are mugs. Absolutely everything I have watched and read today accepts the fiscal rules this government has merely invented to support what it wants to do, like accepting the architects design of the matrix not understanding it doesn’t have to be like that.
The government has every newspaper and TV economic commentator living in the matrix, not the real world. Embarrassing.
Yep. And the same rules will require ever more tinkering, tax rises and spending cuts at every fiscal event going forward as if it makes a blind bit of difference or even starts to address our real problems which require much more radical action. It is busy work for the easily distracted.
@Leon The US right are so despicable that I should not worry about their low opinion.
Nobody is 'worried' about the insults of a rude US senator. What we should be 'worried' about is our own country and the rate at which it's currently circling the u-bend.
I wondered whether Trump would have the strategic sense to postpone tariffs until after the Canadian election to help the candidate that will be more favourable to him for 45 months of the 46 months left in his term.
As it happens, clearly not. Carney gets to be strong in response to Trump in the short election campaign. A month also too short for the negative impact of tariffs to be really felt by Canadians too.
I expect the Liberals end up winning quite comfortably in seat terms.
Some notes from the Telegraph's obituary of Mrs Thatcher's former wossname:-
Sir Julian Seymour, skilled head of Margaret Thatcher’s private office after she left Downing Street ... Leaving office precipitately in November 1990, Mrs Thatcher had, according to Seymour, “no money – and I mean no money – in her bank account”. She had no income outside politics, and a prime minister’s pension of just £25,000 a year. Though her husband Denis was comfortably off, he had never paid for any aspect of her public life, and “never voluntarily put his hand in his pocket”.
Mrs Thatcher was also shocked, upset and disorientated. For 11 years as prime minister she had been working flat out, with her life organised by civil servants in her private office and a small personal staff. The Thatchers had bought a quite unsuitable house in Dulwich and needed somewhere sensible to live. Thousands of letters from the public piled up unanswered in borrowed offices; she had almost forgotten how to dial people direct.
... She spent much of her time raising money for the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, despite being “bored sideways” with it. Mark Thatcher had set it up without observing the legal niceties, and in July 1991, just before Seymour took charge, the Charity Commission refused it charitable status on the grounds that its work was political.
... Mark saw it as a vehicle for getting the world’s wealthy to “pay up for Mumsy”. Once Seymour had diplomatically taken charge, potential contributors were wooed back.
... When Major gave a dinner for her 70th birthday at No 10 the following year, the invitations went out without it having been decided who was paying. After an uncomfortable call from the prime minister’s office, Seymour said he would personally pay the bill until something was sorted out. It never was; in 2019 he said: “I have happily written off my £7,000.”
... At the handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997, Seymour noticed that she seemed “a bit wandery”. He put it down to exhaustion, but later came to see it as an early symptom of mental decline.
In 2018, when Major went public with the view that she had shown symptoms of this even in office, Seymour and Worthington wrote to The Daily Telegraph disagreeing. At the time she left Downing Street, they said, she had not been “ill” but distraught. Only later did she suffer memory loss.
Major said the “sniping” from her during his first days in office “didn’t sound to me like the Margaret I had come to know”. The belief that she was ill had made it easier for him to bear the criticism, “though it was still uncomfortable”.
Neil Kinnock also thought Mrs Thatcher was in mental decline during her premiership. I'd place more stock on those who had known Mrs Thatcher from the beginning than those like Seymour who met her only after she had left office.
On the question of who paid for her dinner, this points to a lack of basic administrative competence at the centre. Something we often think is new, but is at least decades old. Like the Thatcher Foundation being badly set up. Dominic Cummings has probably written a Substack post on it.
The more we study the hubris, arrogance and loss of political nous of her third term the more obvious her mental decline was.
The nation cheered when she was deposed. Even her fans were sick of her by then.
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will...
Another demonstration that he's a fool. There is absolutely no chance of Russia "taking it".
@Leon The US right are so despicable that I should not worry about their low opinion.
Nobody is 'worried' about the insults of a rude US senator. What we should be 'worried' about is our own country and the rate at which it's currently circling the u-bend.
How can you circle a U-bend? Clockwise or anti- ?
Surely that depends on which side of the equator you are.
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will...
Another demonstration that he's a fool. There is absolutely no chance of Russia "taking it".
Some notes from the Telegraph's obituary of Mrs Thatcher's former wossname:-
Sir Julian Seymour, skilled head of Margaret Thatcher’s private office after she left Downing Street ... Leaving office precipitately in November 1990, Mrs Thatcher had, according to Seymour, “no money – and I mean no money – in her bank account”. She had no income outside politics, and a prime minister’s pension of just £25,000 a year. Though her husband Denis was comfortably off, he had never paid for any aspect of her public life, and “never voluntarily put his hand in his pocket”.
Mrs Thatcher was also shocked, upset and disorientated. For 11 years as prime minister she had been working flat out, with her life organised by civil servants in her private office and a small personal staff. The Thatchers had bought a quite unsuitable house in Dulwich and needed somewhere sensible to live. Thousands of letters from the public piled up unanswered in borrowed offices; she had almost forgotten how to dial people direct.
... She spent much of her time raising money for the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, despite being “bored sideways” with it. Mark Thatcher had set it up without observing the legal niceties, and in July 1991, just before Seymour took charge, the Charity Commission refused it charitable status on the grounds that its work was political.
... Mark saw it as a vehicle for getting the world’s wealthy to “pay up for Mumsy”. Once Seymour had diplomatically taken charge, potential contributors were wooed back.
... When Major gave a dinner for her 70th birthday at No 10 the following year, the invitations went out without it having been decided who was paying. After an uncomfortable call from the prime minister’s office, Seymour said he would personally pay the bill until something was sorted out. It never was; in 2019 he said: “I have happily written off my £7,000.”
... At the handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997, Seymour noticed that she seemed “a bit wandery”. He put it down to exhaustion, but later came to see it as an early symptom of mental decline.
In 2018, when Major went public with the view that she had shown symptoms of this even in office, Seymour and Worthington wrote to The Daily Telegraph disagreeing. At the time she left Downing Street, they said, she had not been “ill” but distraught. Only later did she suffer memory loss.
Major said the “sniping” from her during his first days in office “didn’t sound to me like the Margaret I had come to know”. The belief that she was ill had made it easier for him to bear the criticism, “though it was still uncomfortable”.
Neil Kinnock also thought Mrs Thatcher was in mental decline during her premiership. I'd place more stock on those who had known Mrs Thatcher from the beginning than those like Seymour who met her only after she had left office.
(Snip)
I wouldn't necessarily 'trust' the word of Kinnock on this, either.
Being PM is hard - just look at Blair as an example of that. A decade doing the job is bound to build up wear and tear on the old noggin - made worse by the fact that, after such a period, party loyalty is not necessarily what it was, and 'new' ideas are harder to come by. I wouldn't take the mistakes of her third term to be a sign of mental decline; just the problems that a long-term PM faces.
Tesla makes all its cars in the US but imports parts.
"The White House said that 25% tariffs on automotive parts imported to the U.S. would take effect no later than May 3, taxing key items such as engines, transmissions, powertrain parts, and electrical components."
The obvious sufferers are Jaguar, Land Rover who do iirc 50k per annum, and perhaps BWM Mini, and maybe Aston Martin, Bentley and (guessing) McLaren. I don't know who the others are. Are there niche models from Nissan and Toyota?
I'm surprised the total is that high, even at my lower number.
@Leon The US right are so despicable that I should not worry about their low opinion.
Nobody is 'worried' about the insults of a rude US senator. What we should be 'worried' about is our own country and the rate at which it's currently circling the u-bend.
How can you circle a U-bend? Clockwise or anti- ?
Depends whether you are North or South of the Equator.
Lucky is right about the insults. We should be grateful that we have had such a clear and open demonstration of the way they think and talk about us. It will make things so much easier when one of them pops over for talks and a nice photo opportunity with, say, the King and Queen. No need for diplomatic niceties. Just tell 'em what we think.
I have been thinking deeply about this slither of headroom the government has for balancing the budget, and frankly I don’t believe it.
Highest taxes ever in coming years, and massive public spending plans announced before Christmas - this slither of headroom only exists under the governments rules, should we go along with it?
I think they decided these rules and what to prune years ago...
Your analysis falls down, since the whole point of having significant headroom is that everyone recognises that economic forecasts are only an approximation.
If they're wrong in one direction, then there's no problem. However if they overestimate the strength of the economy - which has been more often than not in recent years - then insufficient headroom means emergency budgets and more spending cuts or tax rises.
The point of having a large amount if headroom is to allow consistent economic policy on which everyone can plan for the future.
The OBR only has disproportionate power when the Chancellor fails to make that provision against future uncertainty.
@Leon The US right are so despicable that I should not worry about their low opinion.
Nobody is 'worried' about the insults of a rude US senator. What we should be 'worried' about is our own country and the rate at which it's currently circling the u-bend.
The obvious sufferers are Jaguar, Land Rover who do iirc 50k per annum, and perhaps BWM Mini, and maybe Aston Martin, Bentley and (guessing) McLaren. I don't know who the others are. Are there niche models from Nissan and Toyota?
I'm surprised the total is that high, even at my lower number.
I'll withdraw the "I don't believe". I guess 17% of all of it *is* just under a fifth - if it's a % of all prodiction.
With all the aggressive stuff going on in America's international relations, I'd just like to say that the current Japanese ambassador to the UK uses Twix very, very well to promote relations between our countries:
Reeves plans have already bitten the dust . Even if the UK avoids the tariffs after its grovelling any US trade war with the EU will effect growth here .
I was once again surprised how timid it all was, listening to the Statement yesterday. They just aren't doing the blatantly obvious things.
Are there things in the small print, on for example the Digital Services Tax, which was being trailed?
@Benpointer Is there any point in putting a tariff on Teslas now?
AFAICS the UK is about the only place where Tesla sales are (so far) holding up. Personally, I think it's a completely Ratnered brand - regardless of how good it is as a vehicle. We have an in house expert, who can doubtless tell us whether people are still Just Getting Teslas.
Maybe one to schedule a tariff if the USA does not back down, and to apply it to John Deere tractors and similar as well.
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will...
Another demonstration that he's a fool. There is absolutely no chance of Russia "taking it".
It's so easy to overthink things with Trump. Take him as you see him. There is no depth there. He governs with kneejerk reactions to what he thinks is right and that is usually some expression of populist beliefs. The main exception to this would be his attitude towards Putin, who I suspect is bankrolling him. Otherwise his politics is very much that of the pub boor he so closely resembles.
The now famous Signal conversation has been very helpful in showing how high policy is formulated in the USA under Trump, and it reflects the leader's own character and outlook. It is superficial, ignorant, and incompetent, which is hardly surprising considering he has appointed a bunch of Yesmen reflecting his own outlook on the world.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
It's always about 'find the money' with anyone from the left. As if the state already does things with unquestionable efficiency and the only possible way to improve anything would be to hose taxpayers money at it. Even when we have evidence daily that this is laughably untrue.
Not sure the NHS is best example of that. What people find difficult to accept is we pay a remarkably small proportion of GDP (11%) for a health service that isn't too bad - particularly when you consider how inactive our population is.
Compare to the US at 17%, with a significantly lower life expectancy and health CEOs being murdered in the street to widespread acclaim.
They are doing the Philly cheese stack at the moment which is really rather good, and I recommend the chili cheeseburger too. Better coffee than the coffee chains too.
The now famous Signal conversation has been very helpful in showing how high policy is formulated in the USA under Trump, and it reflects the leader's own character and outlook. It is superficial, ignorant, and incompetent, which is hardly surprising considering he has appointed a bunch of Yesmen reflecting his own outlook on the world.
Surprised Leon and Billy Glenn haven't spammed PB with this, given how keen they were to expose Biden going gaga.
Donald Trump: "We're gonna have tremendous goodies in the bag for women too. The women…Fertilization. I'm still very proud of it, I don't care. I'll be known as the fertilization president and that's okay."
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will...
Another demonstration that he's a fool. There is absolutely no chance of Russia "taking it".
It's so easy to overthink things with Trump. Take him as you see him. There is no depth there. He governs with kneejerk reactions to what he thinks is right and that is usually some expression of populist beliefs. The main exception to this would be his attitude towards Putin, who I suspect is bankrolling him. Otherwise his politics is very much that of the pub boor he so closely resembles.
The now famous Signal conversation has been very helpful in showing how high policy is formulated in the USA under Trump, and it reflects the leader's own character and outlook. It is superficial, ignorant, and incompetent, which is hardly surprising considering he has appointed a bunch of Yesmen reflecting his own outlook on the world.
Someone tried to explain autarky to him and he's decided that anarchy is better. It's all Greek to him.
Some notes from the Telegraph's obituary of Mrs Thatcher's former wossname:-
Sir Julian Seymour, skilled head of Margaret Thatcher’s private office after she left Downing Street ... Leaving office precipitately in November 1990, Mrs Thatcher had, according to Seymour, “no money – and I mean no money – in her bank account”. She had no income outside politics, and a prime minister’s pension of just £25,000 a year. Though her husband Denis was comfortably off, he had never paid for any aspect of her public life, and “never voluntarily put his hand in his pocket”.
Mrs Thatcher was also shocked, upset and disorientated. For 11 years as prime minister she had been working flat out, with her life organised by civil servants in her private office and a small personal staff. The Thatchers had bought a quite unsuitable house in Dulwich and needed somewhere sensible to live. Thousands of letters from the public piled up unanswered in borrowed offices; she had almost forgotten how to dial people direct.
... She spent much of her time raising money for the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, despite being “bored sideways” with it. Mark Thatcher had set it up without observing the legal niceties, and in July 1991, just before Seymour took charge, the Charity Commission refused it charitable status on the grounds that its work was political.
... Mark saw it as a vehicle for getting the world’s wealthy to “pay up for Mumsy”. Once Seymour had diplomatically taken charge, potential contributors were wooed back.
... When Major gave a dinner for her 70th birthday at No 10 the following year, the invitations went out without it having been decided who was paying. After an uncomfortable call from the prime minister’s office, Seymour said he would personally pay the bill until something was sorted out. It never was; in 2019 he said: “I have happily written off my £7,000.”
... At the handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997, Seymour noticed that she seemed “a bit wandery”. He put it down to exhaustion, but later came to see it as an early symptom of mental decline.
In 2018, when Major went public with the view that she had shown symptoms of this even in office, Seymour and Worthington wrote to The Daily Telegraph disagreeing. At the time she left Downing Street, they said, she had not been “ill” but distraught. Only later did she suffer memory loss.
Major said the “sniping” from her during his first days in office “didn’t sound to me like the Margaret I had come to know”. The belief that she was ill had made it easier for him to bear the criticism, “though it was still uncomfortable”.
Neil Kinnock also thought Mrs Thatcher was in mental decline during her premiership. I'd place more stock on those who had known Mrs Thatcher from the beginning than those like Seymour who met her only after she had left office.
On the question of who paid for her dinner, this points to a lack of basic administrative competence at the centre. Something we often think is new, but is at least decades old. Like the Thatcher Foundation being badly set up. Dominic Cummings has probably written a Substack post on it.
The dinner reflects badly on Major/the state. It *should* have paid for the dinner
The UK is in a horrible position . Stuck in this situation with having to go cap in hand to Trump and too frightened to retaliate .
What's the point of retaliating? If we stick a tariff of 25% on imported US stuff it just costs our own consumers more to buy stuff.
It's an import tax. It helps Reeves balance the books without increasing income tax or VAT.
It is a tax on UK consumers
Correct. And it helps Reeves balance the books without increasing income tax or VAT. It could bring in the odd billion, paid for by purchasers of US goods and services.
I have been thinking deeply about this slither of headroom the government has for balancing the budget, and frankly I don’t believe it.
Highest taxes ever in coming years, and massive public spending plans announced before Christmas - this slither of headroom only exists under the governments rules, should we go along with it?
I think they decided these rules and what to prune years ago...
Your analysis falls down, since the whole point of having significant headroom is that everyone recognises that economic forecasts are only an approximation.
If they're wrong in one direction, then there's no problem. However if they overestimate the strength of the economy - which has been more often than not in recent years - then insufficient headroom means emergency budgets and more spending cuts or tax rises.
The point of having a large amount if headroom is to allow consistent economic policy on which everyone can plan for the future.
The OBR only has disproportionate power when the Chancellor fails to make that provision against future uncertainty.
And then we come back to the shit that Sunak and Hunt left their successors to clean up, treating fiscal headroom like Brewster's Millions.
I have been thinking deeply about this slither of headroom the government has for balancing the budget, and frankly I don’t believe it.
Highest taxes ever in coming years, and massive public spending plans announced before Christmas - this slither of headroom only exists under the governments rules, should we go along with it?
I think they decided these rules and what to prune years ago. The rules create this impression that things are tight something has to be pruned - but different rules like halve the public spending committed to, or not pay more than 2% gdp on defence, and there’s room for generous tax cuts, not this fabricated impression of slither of nothing to play with so pruning must happen. Raise a tax rather than prune is the other way to go. You can argue 2.5% defence spending is needed, or public service investment is needed, or direct taxes must not go up, but you can’t argue we can have a completely different set of government priorities and rules than these, of course we can.
I think all the newspapers and commentators are mugs. Absolutely everything I have watched and read today accepts the fiscal rules this government has merely invented to support what it wants to do, like accepting the architects design of the matrix not understanding it doesn’t have to be like that.
The government has every newspaper and TV economic commentator living in the matrix, not the real world. Embarrassing.
Labour have been captured by the Whitehall machinery. They are literally doing what the Treasury are telling them to do or else.
We cannot carry on like this. The country is broken and they can't carry on breaking it. We'll get Farage, and when Farage fails God alone knows.
Reeves plans have already bitten the dust . Even if the UK avoids the tariffs after its grovelling any US trade war with the EU will effect growth here .
I was once again surprised how timid it all was, listening to the Statement yesterday. They just aren't doing the blatantly obvious things.
Are there things in the small print, on for example the Digital Services Tax, which was being trailed?
@Benpointer Is there any point in putting a tariff on Teslas now?
AFAICS the UK is about the only place where Tesla sales are (so far) holding up. Personally, I think it's a completely Ratnered brand - regardless of how good it is as a vehicle. We have an in house expert, who can doubtless tell us whether people are still Just Getting Teslas.
Maybe one to schedule a tariff if the USA does not back down, and to apply it to John Deere tractors and similar as well.
I'm glad it's not me doing it.
A couple of farmers I know are blooming angry with John Deere over their repair and maintenance policies; so much so, that one has moved onto another brand. A non-American one. That was before Trump V2...
A couple of farmers I know are blooming angry with John Deere over their repair and maintenance policies; so much so, that one has moved onto another brand. A non-American one. That was before Trump V2...
I am vaguely curious what impact Clarkson had if any on Lamborghini sales
The UK is in a horrible position . Stuck in this situation with having to go cap in hand to Trump and too frightened to retaliate .
What's the point of retaliating? If we stick a tariff of 25% on imported US stuff it just costs our own consumers more to buy stuff.
It's an import tax. It helps Reeves balance the books without increasing income tax or VAT.
It is a tax on UK consumers
Correct. And it helps Reeves balance the books without increasing income tax or VAT. It could bring in the odd billion, paid for by purchasers of US goods and services.
That’s assuming zero substitution which is the actual point of a tariff
The now famous Signal conversation has been very helpful in showing how high policy is formulated in the USA under Trump, and it reflects the leader's own character and outlook. It is superficial, ignorant, and incompetent, which is hardly surprising considering he has appointed a bunch of Yesmen reflecting his own outlook on the world.
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
Reform live in a fantasy land. It is incredible to me. The tories and labour should be flagging reform policies and their actual effects every time the camera is on them, rather than trying to try emulate.
P.S. we need to get back in to the single market ASAP. 2/3 of the electorate want it. The vast majority of MPs want it. Why are we being held hostage to a political movement that belongs to the past. By 2029 brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age alone... that isn't taking into account the people who change their mind and the new young rejoiners crowding into the electorate in the other end of the system. Brexit is stone dead and the atlantic security pillar has dropped away. Let's move on.
Reform are listening to voters. No, not just angry gammony racists - normal voters. The ones who are broke, can see the country getting broker, and can't understand why neither party has done anything about it.
As for Brexit, that battle is won. With the collapse of NATO we will need to form something else, and its not going to be the armed division of the EU. It will something else. We absolutely have to be part of that.
The UK is in a horrible position . Stuck in this situation with having to go cap in hand to Trump and too frightened to retaliate .
What's the point of retaliating? If we stick a tariff of 25% on imported US stuff it just costs our own consumers more to buy stuff.
It's an import tax. It helps Reeves balance the books without increasing income tax or VAT.
It is a tax on UK consumers
Correct. And it helps Reeves balance the books without increasing income tax or VAT. It could bring in the odd billion, paid for by purchasers of US goods and services.
That’s assuming zero substitution which is the actual point of a tariff
No. There may be some substitution but not total so it still raises taxes. Reeves probably welcomes the prospect of increased import tariffs.
My daughter and I are currently planning a style recreation of a MickyDs cheeseburger. Have bought exactly the right ground chuck steak, got the salt and msg ready (they add msg to their patties), the cheese, gherkins, the right mustard and ketchup, and are making the tiny dried then rehydrated onion bits and small ribbons of iceberg lettuce.
Not been to an outlet for a good 3 weeks though.
And a note to our Uruguayan convert to the worthy opinions of the US right: I don’t grow Bacchus.
I have been thinking deeply about this slither of headroom the government has for balancing the budget, and frankly I don’t believe it.
Highest taxes ever in coming years, and massive public spending plans announced before Christmas - this slither of headroom only exists under the governments rules, should we go along with it?
I think they decided these rules and what to prune years ago. The rules create this impression that things are tight something has to be pruned - but different rules like halve the public spending committed to, or not pay more than 2% gdp on defence, and there’s room for generous tax cuts, not this fabricated impression of slither of nothing to play with so pruning must happen. Raise a tax rather than prune is the other way to go. You can argue 2.5% defence spending is needed, or public service investment is needed, or direct taxes must not go up, but you can’t argue we can have a completely different set of government priorities and rules than these, of course we can.
I think all the newspapers and commentators are mugs. Absolutely everything I have watched and read today accepts the fiscal rules this government has merely invented to support what it wants to do, like accepting the architects design of the matrix not understanding it doesn’t have to be like that.
The government has every newspaper and TV economic commentator living in the matrix, not the real world. Embarrassing.
Labour have been captured by the Whitehall machinery. They are literally doing what the Treasury are telling them to do or else.
We cannot carry on like this. The country is broken and they can't carry on breaking it. We'll get Farage, and when Farage fails God alone knows.
But from how the media are universally covering it point of view, is “what’s gone wrong to force you into it” actually from the real world?
Here on PB in this reply from you, and posts from others, acknowledgement government have not recently been forced into a decision actually taken long ago, and part of a plan. But the mainstream media are nowhere near the reality here. 🤷♀️
Pretty damning for 14 years of Tory misrule at Home Office and Ministry of Justice.
Although unless Labour can improve it, Farage will use it against both parties with equal effect.
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Where is Farage going to find the money? He is promising tax cuts and increased spending. Just yesterday he was crying crocodile tears over cuts to school dinners for the nippers.
Reform live in a fantasy land. It is incredible to me. The tories and labour should be flagging reform policies and their actual effects every time the camera is on them, rather than trying to try emulate.
P.S. we need to get back in to the single market ASAP. 2/3 of the electorate want it. The vast majority of MPs want it. Why are we being held hostage to a political movement that belongs to the past. By 2029 brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age alone... that isn't taking into account the people who change their mind and the new young rejoiners crowding into the electorate in the other end of the system. Brexit is stone dead and the atlantic security pillar has dropped away. Let's move on.
Reform are listening to voters. No, not just angry gammony racists - normal voters. The ones who are broke, can see the country getting broker, and can't understand why neither party has done anything about it.
As for Brexit, that battle is won. With the collapse of NATO we will need to form something else, and its not going to be the armed division of the EU. It will something else. We absolutely have to be part of that.
If it wasn't for brexit Reeves would have another 50bn to play around with. It could have coverd benefits, nhs and defense.... the populist right is utterly deluded.
One thing I don't understand is Trump's attitude towards Canada and Greenland.
My own view is that Trump looks at "strongman" dictators, like Putin and Xi, flexing their muscles, and wishes he could get a piece of the action.
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will...
Another demonstration that he's a fool. There is absolutely no chance of Russia "taking it".
It's so easy to overthink things with Trump. Take him as you see him. There is no depth there. He governs with kneejerk reactions to what he thinks is right and that is usually some expression of populist beliefs. The main exception to this would be his attitude towards Putin, who I suspect is bankrolling him. Otherwise his politics is very much that of the pub boor he so closely resembles.
The now famous Signal conversation has been very helpful in showing how high policy is formulated in the USA under Trump, and it reflects the leader's own character and outlook. It is superficial, ignorant, and incompetent, which is hardly surprising considering he has appointed a bunch of Yesmen reflecting his own outlook on the world.
Agreed but the difference with Trump this time around is that he is surrounded by really nasty individuals who are being given free rein to pursue their agendas.
Most of us have factored in that Trump behaves like a toddler with ADHD but he's just the puppet who enables Vance, Musk, Hesketh, Kennedy. Gabbard and co. There in lies the real danger.
Comments
I think he DOES genuinely look down at Canada is nothing more than the 51st State of America. And as far as Greenland is concerned, he probably figures if the US doesn't take it, eventually Russia will.
But nobody should be under any illusion that Trump and those around him are potential internal and expansionist dictators but for the US Constitution, which the Founding Fathers created in a way to specifically stop the US ever being governed by a dictator (whether that makes them "fascist" - A word that's banded around too much, IMO, I'm not sure)
In the next four years, we'll find out how robust that Constitution envisioned by the Washington, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson is... It contained Trump rather well from 2016 to 2020 but I think he is determined to push things much, much further in his second term... So we'll see...
But the damage will be done.
Highest taxes ever in coming years, and massive public spending plans announced before Christmas - this slither of headroom only exists under the governments rules, should we go along with it?
I think they decided these rules and what to prune years ago. The rules create this impression that things are tight something has to be pruned - but different rules like halve the public spending committed to, or not pay more than 2% gdp on defence, and there’s room for generous tax cuts, not this fabricated impression of slither of nothing to play with so pruning must happen. Raise a tax rather than prune is the other way to go. You can argue 2.5% defence spending is needed, or public service investment is needed, or direct taxes must not go up, but you can’t argue we can have a completely different set of government priorities and rules than these, of course we can.
I think all the newspapers and commentators are mugs. Absolutely everything I have watched and read today accepts the fiscal rules this government has merely invented to support what it wants to do, like accepting the architects design of the matrix not understanding it doesn’t have to be like that.
The government has every newspaper and TV economic commentator living in the matrix, not the real world. Embarrassing.
Sir Julian Seymour, skilled head of Margaret Thatcher’s private office after she left Downing Street
...
Leaving office precipitately in November 1990, Mrs Thatcher had, according to Seymour, “no money – and I mean no money – in her bank account”. She had no income outside politics, and a prime minister’s pension of just £25,000 a year. Though her husband Denis was comfortably off, he had never paid for any aspect of her public life, and “never voluntarily put his hand in his pocket”.
Mrs Thatcher was also shocked, upset and disorientated. For 11 years as prime minister she had been working flat out, with her life organised by civil servants in her private office and a small personal staff. The Thatchers had bought a quite unsuitable house in Dulwich and needed somewhere sensible to live. Thousands of letters from the public piled up unanswered in borrowed offices; she had almost forgotten how to dial people direct.
...
She spent much of her time raising money for the Margaret Thatcher Foundation, despite being “bored sideways” with it. Mark Thatcher had set it up without observing the legal niceties, and in July 1991, just before Seymour took charge, the Charity Commission refused it charitable status on the grounds that its work was political.
... Mark saw it as a vehicle for getting the world’s wealthy to “pay up for Mumsy”. Once Seymour had diplomatically taken charge, potential contributors were wooed back.
...
When Major gave a dinner for her 70th birthday at No 10 the following year, the invitations went out without it having been decided who was paying. After an uncomfortable call from the prime minister’s office, Seymour said he would personally pay the bill until something was sorted out. It never was; in 2019 he said: “I have happily written off my £7,000.”
...
At the handover of Hong Kong to China in July 1997, Seymour noticed that she seemed “a bit wandery”. He put it down to exhaustion, but later came to see it as an early symptom of mental decline.
In 2018, when Major went public with the view that she had shown symptoms of this even in office, Seymour and Worthington wrote to The Daily Telegraph disagreeing. At the time she left Downing Street, they said, she had not been “ill” but distraught. Only later did she suffer memory loss.
Major said the “sniping” from her during his first days in office “didn’t sound to me like the Margaret I had come to know”. The belief that she was ill had made it easier for him to bear the criticism, “though it was still uncomfortable”.
Seymour and Worthington insisted that at that stage they saw her “virtually every day”, and did not detect any signs of decline; in their opinion, and that of her medical advisers, she did not display such traits “until after Sir John’s time as Prime Minister”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2025/03/26/sir-julian-seymour-thatcher-assistant-after-no-10-obituary/ (£££)
Senior officials warn nations including China, Pakistan and Iran could attempt to subvert vote with sophisticated tools
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/26/canada-election-india-interference-warning
Could never happen here! Or if it did, it would be strenuously denied by the beneficiary.
...
The report by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) says that the rate of positive outcomes – when police identify a suspect and they face justice – has crashed from 25% in England and Wales a decade ago to 11% in 2024.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/mar/27/police-too-overworked-to-investigate-crimes-properly-england-wales-northern-ireland
Bloc’s first preparedness strategy urges people to prepare for floods, fires, pandemics or military strikes
...
Swedish authorities recommend keeping at home a good supply of water, energy-rich food, blankets and alternative heating, as well as investing in a battery-powered radio. Norway advises people to stock up on non-essential medicines, including iodine tablets in the case of a nuclear incident. German households have been urged to adapt their own cellars, garages or store rooms for use as bunkers, while housebuilders will be legally obliged to include safe shelters in new homes – as Poland has already done.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/26/stockpile-supplies-72-hours-disasters-attack-eu-tells-citizens
Marco Taffoni stole Bottega Veneta handbags worth £15,000 due to rent rise and ‘cost of living’ in the capital
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/thieving-harrods-worker-spared-jail-as-judge-agrees-london-is-expensive-99bxvj5n5 (£££)
Who among us has not pinched £15,000-worth of posh handbags because the McDonald's saver menu went up?
There was a magical atmosphere down the beach yesterday afternoon, with blue sky and warm sun above, yet a bank of sea fog just offshore with long wisps gently moving across the beach and into the town.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g71lnv40ko
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg5drv3el52o
https://bsky.app/profile/chriso-wiki.bsky.social/post/3llbf7z553a2u
And where does Labour get the money to improve it? It's just driven a quarter of a million more into poverty yesterday. That's another quarter of a million potentially stealing high-end handbags/creme eggs to make ends meet.
Although I suspect they are reserved for the autumn, when she comes back to raise taxes...
If we take the account of the Times' sister paper, the judge's reasoning is that this was a one-off (spread over six months) and the thief will not reoffend. After that it gets a bit silly because on the one hand the judge agrees it was due to the cost-of-living crisis, but on the other hand she orders him to pay £11,000 compensation. So is he skint or isn't he?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/34077713/harrods-worker-jails-cost-living/
IMO: There is probably some vague thoughts about securing natural resources but far, far more prominent in his mind is that he heard some talking head talking about how they should be part of USA and impulsively decided to pursue it.
I think it is a mistake to ascribe much strategic thought to his actions; the only reason some of his actions have achieved strategic success in the past couple of months is because of the
USA's superpower status, so others are rightly reluctant to call out the nonsensensical stances for what they are.
When did this start (I know it’s been around for a while) and is there nobody the MPs will listen too who can say “you sound like a bunch of retards, it’s doesn’t win the argument, the public find it childish and embarrassing, please stop.”.
I could feel my insides turning and twisting with cringe.
There are plenty of countries many people travel to regularly and happily with far more arbitrary law enforcement, both at the borders and within.
And we are vanishingly insignificant as individuals so don't stop going as a political stance imo.
I will probably avoid the USA as, apart from it's dropzones it has never got anywhere near the top of my list of long-haul destinations. But if I had a reason to make the trip (family etc) I'd do so, just with a few sensible precautions.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/mar/26/phone-search-privacy-us-border-immigration?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
There was a report just the other day that so-called counter-terror tactics (or in reality, simply prioritising offenders) had led to a large increase in arrests. And that is without the Prime Minister's favourite panacea, AI.
Counter terror tactics help Met Police catch 100 predators targeting women and girls
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/met-police-violence-against-women-scheme-b2718936.html
P.S. we need to get back in to the single market ASAP. 2/3 of the electorate want it. The vast majority of MPs want it. Why are we being held hostage to a political movement that belongs to the past. By 2029 brexiteerism will have lost 1/6 of its voters to old age alone... that isn't taking into account the people who change their mind and the new young rejoiners crowding into the electorate in the other end of the system. Brexit is stone dead and the atlantic security pillar has dropped away. Let's move on.
But here is the thing. The US governments approach to curtailment of research topics means that US universities cannot meaningfully host international conferences without compromising their own funding. For instance, research focusing on women.... heads up women are just over half of the human population. You cannot restrict that as a research area and expect it to not impact its organisation.
https://www.cfr.org/blog/women-week-trump-administration-restricts-scientific-research-aimed-improving-lives-women-and
Question is, why are China and co so keen on the libs triumphing in Canada?
I haven't been to America in over a decade. It will be interesting to see the changes. I have visited a number of autocratic states over the years so will try to stay under the radar.
Farage would be a terrible Prime Minister. Lazy, drunken and in hock to foreign powers that hate us.
On the question of who paid for her dinner, this points to a lack of basic administrative competence at the centre. Something we often think is new, but is at least decades old. Like the Thatcher Foundation being badly set up. Dominic Cummings has probably written a Substack post on it.
As it happens, clearly not. Carney gets to be strong in response to Trump in the short election campaign. A month also too short for the negative impact of tariffs to be really felt by Canadians too.
I expect the Liberals end up winning quite comfortably in seat terms.
The nation cheered when she was deposed. Even her fans were sick of her by then.
There is absolutely no chance of Russia "taking it".
There is absolutely no chance of Russia "taking it".
Being PM is hard - just look at Blair as an example of that. A decade doing the job is bound to build up wear and tear on the old noggin - made worse by the fact that, after such a period, party loyalty is not necessarily what it was, and 'new' ideas are harder to come by. I wouldn't take the mistakes of her third term to be a sign of mental decline; just the problems that a long-term PM faces.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/auto-industry-rocked-by-trumps-25-tariffs-us-imports-2025-03-27/
Tesla makes all its cars in the US but imports parts.
"The White House said that 25% tariffs on automotive parts imported to the U.S. would take effect no later than May 3, taxing key items such as engines, transmissions, powertrain parts, and electrical components."
The USA is quoted as 17%, not being clear whether that is % of exports or % of production. So that is something like 120k to 170k units.
https://www.smmt.co.uk/automotive-intelligence/driving-global-britain/
The obvious sufferers are Jaguar, Land Rover who do iirc 50k per annum, and perhaps BWM Mini, and maybe Aston Martin, Bentley and (guessing) McLaren. I don't know who the others are. Are there niche models from Nissan and Toyota?
I'm surprised the total is that high, even at my lower number.
Lucky is right about the insults. We should be grateful that we have had such a clear and open demonstration of the way they think and talk about us. It will make things so much easier when one of them pops over for talks and a nice photo opportunity with, say, the King and Queen. No need for diplomatic niceties. Just tell 'em what we think.
If they're wrong in one direction, then there's no problem. However if they overestimate the strength of the economy - which has been more often than not in recent years - then insufficient headroom means emergency budgets and more spending cuts or tax rises.
The point of having a large amount if headroom is to allow consistent economic policy on which everyone can plan for the future.
The OBR only has disproportionate power when the Chancellor fails to make that provision against future uncertainty.
A project for Lord Mandelbrot.
https://x.com/AmbJapanUK/status/1903743597104497031
https://x.com/AmbJapanUK/status/1903736113182785954
Are there things in the small print, on for example the Digital Services Tax, which was being trailed?
@Benpointer
Is there any point in putting a tariff on Teslas now?
AFAICS the UK is about the only place where Tesla sales are (so far) holding up. Personally, I think it's a completely Ratnered brand - regardless of how good it is as a vehicle. We have an in house expert, who can doubtless tell us whether people are still Just Getting Teslas.
Maybe one to schedule a tariff if the USA does not back down, and to apply it to John Deere tractors and similar as well.
I'm glad it's not me doing it.
The now famous Signal conversation has been very helpful in showing how high policy is formulated in the USA under Trump, and it reflects the leader's own character and outlook. It is superficial, ignorant, and incompetent, which is hardly surprising considering he has appointed a bunch of Yesmen reflecting his own outlook on the world.
Compare to the US at 17%, with a significantly lower life expectancy and health CEOs being murdered in the street to widespread acclaim.
There is no nefarious plot. Trump hired a bunch of stupid fucks.
https://x.com/FPWellman/status/1905037142276878336
What he is saying is utter garbage. But if you listen to the clip he’s interacting with the audience in a switched on manner
We cannot carry on like this. The country is broken and they can't carry on breaking it. We'll get Farage, and when Farage fails God alone knows.
NEW THREAD
https://bsky.app/profile/seamas.bsky.social/post/3llbw7cvcps2x
As for Brexit, that battle is won. With the collapse of NATO we will need to form something else, and its not going to be the armed division of the EU. It will something else. We absolutely have to be part of that.
My daughter and I are currently planning a style recreation of a MickyDs cheeseburger. Have bought exactly the right ground chuck steak, got the salt and msg ready (they add msg to their patties), the cheese, gherkins, the right mustard and ketchup, and are making the tiny dried then rehydrated onion bits and small ribbons of iceberg lettuce.
Not been to an outlet for a good 3 weeks though.
And a note to our Uruguayan convert to the worthy opinions of the US right: I don’t grow Bacchus.
Here on PB in this reply from you, and posts from others, acknowledgement government have not recently been forced into a decision actually taken long ago, and part of a plan. But the mainstream media are nowhere near the reality here. 🤷♀️
Most of us have factored in that Trump behaves like a toddler with ADHD but he's just the puppet who enables Vance, Musk, Hesketh, Kennedy. Gabbard and co. There in lies the real danger.