Skip to content
Options

Perhaps the government will not get the blame – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,601
edited April 20 in General
Perhaps the government will not get the blame – politicalbetting.com

In recent years the trend has been for incumbent governments to lose elections in part because of the cost of living crises and it is possible the current Labour government will join that list.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,700
    Bagsies
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,473
    Second like the Tories
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,781
    FP2: Doohan loses his no claims bonus.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    StillWaters said:

    Second like the Tories

    Optimist.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,030
    The poll in the header ignores another blame drain: President Trump.

    That said, I'm not sure any of this will help the government very much in the long term. By the time of the next election, the question of who dug the hole will be secondary to the need to climb out of it.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,742
    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,655
    The stunned silence on the US right after Trump´s Tariff of Misfortune game show performance has been quite remarkable. I think the backlash will take a little while to come, since the scale of the disaster is so immense that it takes a while to grasp it, especially for the knuckle draggers n the GOP congressional delegation.

    However, after the absolute rout across global markets it is pretty clear that Trump is facing a choice: walk back from this disaster or own it.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,700
    StillWaters said:

    Second like the Tories

    First, like a light blue lean-to portaloo (see avatar).

    Or Reform, maybe.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,473
    Fpt @rcs1000 re: politicians who impress

    I’ve had the pleasure (sic) of getting to know many politicians well over the years.

    Those that impressed: Paddy Mayhew, David Trimble, Paddy Ashdown, Norman Fowler, Quintin Hogg, Micky Ancram, John Smith

    Those that stood out on the other side: Cameron, Osborne, Ken Clarke, Michael Heseltine, Tony Blair.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    Cicero said:

    after the absolute rout across global markets it is pretty clear that Trump is facing a choice: walk back from this disaster or own it.

    Based on his performance on AF1 last night on his way to play golf (instead of meeting the bodies of the dead soldiers from Lithuania BTW) he might just declare victory when he rolls them back
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,700
    edited April 4
    So, I haven't seen Trump's tarriffs expressed as an average. I link something below, but across 2-3 sources, as far as I can make out:

    Average import tariff applied was around 2.2% on Biden leaving office (itself possibly up from 1.3% in 2021, though not sure Wiki gives a like for like measure)

    Tarriffs applied before April raised that to around 11% average.

    Tarriffs now stand at 22.5% average (likely that number moves organically as trade flows reorganise to stone extent).

    So, a bit above VAT sized on imported goods, and obviously state sales taxes on top.

    https://budgetlab.yale.edu/research/where-we-stand-fiscal-economic-and-distributional-effects-all-us-tariffs-enacted-2025-through-april

    (FPT)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    £1 trillion worth of UK card transactions in 2024 as people move away from cash and contactless booms

    UK issued debit and credit cards were used to make 31.4 billion transactions in 2024 (both here and abroad) - up from 30.2 billion transactions in 2023, according to UK Finance research.

    At the end of 2024 there were 163.4 million UK debit and credit cards issued, up from 159.7 million at the end of 2023. The total value of transactions on these cards was just over £1 trillion during 2024 - in line with 2023 - and split between:

    Debit card spend of £797 billion - down 0.8% compared to 2023

    Credit card transactions worth £249 billion - up 5.3% compared to 2023 (credit card transactions include card purchases, cash withdrawals and balance transfers)

    Since 2019, the value of debit and credit card transactions made by UK cardholders has increased by 26%; however, the number of transactions made on these cards has risen by 42%. This shows a move towards a larger number of payments for a lower average value, driven by factors including:

    People moving away from cash towards debit cards

    The continued trend towards small businesses accepting card payments, and for cards being accepted for low value transactions

    The growth of contactless payments, with it being easier to make lower value transactions using cards as well as smartphones and watches

    There were 18.9 billion contactless transactions made in 2024 - a 3.4% increase compared to 2023. The average value of a contactless transaction in 2024 was £15.86 - a 1.7% rise compared to 2023. These figures include both UK issued cards and overseas cards being used within the UK.

    https://retailtechinnovationhub.com/home/2025/4/1/1-trillion-worth-of-uk-card-transactions-in-2024-as-people-move-away-from-cash-and-contactless-booms
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,708
    FPT:
    IanB2 said:

    Benpointer said:

    PB Brains Trust: Does anyone know if the cost of buying back years of NI contributions is going up after 5th April?

    My HMRC app says I have an option to buy back three years to get the maximum State Pension and that I will continue to have that option until 2028... but it doesn't specify whether the price will remain the same.

    I just bought a year for £820 odd, and to buy the year after (which I don’t need, now being at max) cost over £900. So the cost certainly varies depending on which year you are paying for. Whether the cost of a given year increases through time, I don’t know, although it would be logical that it should.
    I think an important point is how far back you can go to buy years is changing.

    I had a black spot quite some time ago I need to take the time to look at today.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    It was an utter joke, I fixed my gas and elec in January 2022 for two years and thanks to the government intervention I was £400 better off which went to my shoe fund.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,748
    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    That's easy for you to say...
  • kamskikamski Posts: 6,470
    Cicero said:

    The stunned silence on the US right after Trump´s Tariff of Misfortune game show performance has been quite remarkable. I think the backlash will take a little while to come, since the scale of the disaster is so immense that it takes a while to grasp it, especially for the knuckle draggers n the GOP congressional delegation.

    However, after the absolute rout across global markets it is pretty clear that Trump is facing a choice: walk back from this disaster or own it.

    Should the rest of the world give him an off-ramp so he can claim victory? Something like the "voluntary export restraints" on Japanese cars in the 80s? The problem with those is they would still increase prices, but the price increase would go to extra profits for foreign car makers, and wouldn't raise revenue to give as tax cuts to billionaires.

    How about Europe agrees not to cancel all of their orders with US arms companies?

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,589
    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    David, question is why only the UK prices rocketed, every other country had increases but nowhere on the scale the grifters applied here. Most of our woe is government applied due to the crazy pricing system and shit regulator.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    Did we miss this?

    https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/dale-vince-libel-guido-fawkes/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,005
    Daveyboy1961 said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    That's easy for you to say...
    Ya think? Typing on an iPhone is bloody difficult, I can tell you.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,851
    StillWaters said:

    Fpt @rcs1000 re: politicians who impress

    I’ve had the pleasure (sic) of getting to know many politicians well over the years.

    Those that impressed: Paddy Mayhew, David Trimble, Paddy Ashdown, Norman Fowler, Quintin Hogg, Micky Ancram, John Smith

    Those that stood out on the other side: Cameron, Osborne, Ken Clarke, Michael Heseltine, Tony Blair.

    I met Tony Blair too. He did not impress.

    Ken Clarke I met at the Cambridge Union, where he demonstrated an extraordinary ability to drink alcohol and smoke. He was clearly very smart. But he was like a very smart homeless person, who would never achieve his potential.

    Quentin Hogg I would have loved to have met.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,940
    WANTED

    PIED PIPER

    Apply Birmingham City Council
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    Red Flag in free practice 2 due to the grass being on fire.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,589
    kamski said:

    Cicero said:

    The stunned silence on the US right after Trump´s Tariff of Misfortune game show performance has been quite remarkable. I think the backlash will take a little while to come, since the scale of the disaster is so immense that it takes a while to grasp it, especially for the knuckle draggers n the GOP congressional delegation.

    However, after the absolute rout across global markets it is pretty clear that Trump is facing a choice: walk back from this disaster or own it.

    Should the rest of the world give him an off-ramp so he can claim victory? Something like the "voluntary export restraints" on Japanese cars in the 80s? The problem with those is they would still increase prices, but the price increase would go to extra profits for foreign car makers, and wouldn't raise revenue to give as tax cuts to billionaires.

    How about Europe agrees not to cancel all of their orders with US arms companies?

    They should roger him sensible
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,781
    FP2: some grass on fire, which is not exactly normal...
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,297
    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I'm trying (and failing) to remember the timeline. Didn't Truss spend the leadership campaign saying that a big energy bailout was unaffordable and wrong, and then unleash a big energy bailout out of nowhere?

    But yes, most of us should have suffered more than we did, which wasn't very much. But electorally, suicidal.

    Is this what the decadence that precedes decline and fall looks like?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,005
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    David, question is why only the UK prices rocketed, every other country had increases but nowhere on the scale the grifters applied here. Most of our woe is government applied due to the crazy pricing system and shit regulator.
    Certainly agree about the regulators. And the obsession with "the market" when the structures were set up has made us peculiarly susceptible to the spot price at any one time. Most people are not at all interested in markets like this which are complicated and boring. What they want are prices that are fixed over the medium period, that are predictable and which they can ignore.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    kamski said:

    Should the rest of the world give him an off-ramp so he can claim victory?

    He is already claiming victory

    Facts have no place in his head
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,589
    Stuartinromford said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I'm trying (and failing) to remember the timeline. Didn't Truss spend the leadership campaign saying that a big energy bailout was unaffordable and wrong, and then unleash a big energy bailout out of nowhere?

    But yes, most of us should have suffered more than we did, which wasn't very much. But electorally, suicidal.

    Is this what the decadence that precedes decline and fall looks like?
    Not sure what planet you live on but my utility bills are 3 times what they were several years ago. Lots of people have no way to afford such increases they are not all dripping with cash.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,005
    Stuartinromford said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I'm trying (and failing) to remember the timeline. Didn't Truss spend the leadership campaign saying that a big energy bailout was unaffordable and wrong, and then unleash a big energy bailout out of nowhere?

    But yes, most of us should have suffered more than we did, which wasn't very much. But electorally, suicidal.

    Is this what the decadence that precedes decline and fall looks like?
    Panem et circenses. There is nothing new under the sun.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,589
    Alanbrooke said:

    WANTED

    PIED PIPER

    Apply Birmingham City Council

    Hello Alan, doubt even Superman could help those Turkeys.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 25,496
    It isn't about blame.

    Crises present opportunities. Governance requires responsibility.

    Handle the crisis well, you get the credit.
    Handle it badly, you get the blame.

    There is no "but it started in America/was a global pandemic" get out of jail free card at the next election if you mishandle the situation and the public are pissed off.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 60,851
    williamglenn said:

    On topic:

    https://x.com/maxtempers/status/1905922408378146995

    Expanding on this, the British state is excellent at externalising the blame for its own behaviour.

    ‘Why are new builds so shoddy? Must be the greedy developers’
    ‘Why are energy costs so high? Must be the ravenous privatised utility companies’
    ‘Why are manufacturing plants shutting down? Must be the evil foreign owners’

    Outcomes that are a product of bad incentive structures as a result of sweeping top-down mandates and state intervention are pinned on the private sector.

    Fortunately, the current US government has never externalized blame for its own failings.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    @nakashimae

    We have confirmed that the NSA director, Gen. Tim Haugh, and his deputy Wendy Noble, were fired on Thursday. Reason is unclear.

    https://x.com/nakashimae/status/1907986291829952553
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,005
    malcolmg said:

    Alanbrooke said:

    WANTED

    PIED PIPER

    Apply Birmingham City Council

    Hello Alan, doubt even Superman could help those Turkeys.
    They've got turkeys in the streets? Worse than I thought. I thought it was just rats.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    @mitchprothero

    I can’t decide which is worse: That Laura Loomer can get the head of the NSA fired or that the president of the United States used 30 minutes of a work day to meet with Laura Loomer. He shouldn’t have the time.

    https://x.com/mitchprothero/status/1908039924395151765
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    Alanbrooke said:

    WANTED

    PIED PIPER

    Apply Birmingham City Council

    Why your interest? Rats the size of Rachel Reeves.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,708
    edited April 4
    Cicero said:

    The stunned silence on the US right after Trump´s Tariff of Misfortune game show performance has been quite remarkable. I think the backlash will take a little while to come, since the scale of the disaster is so immense that it takes a while to grasp it, especially for the knuckle draggers n the GOP congressional delegation.

    However, after the absolute rout across global markets it is pretty clear that Trump is facing a choice: walk back from this disaster or own it.

    I think that the need for "time to sink in" is true about a lot of things Trump. That's one reason why he tries to create facts on the ground, whether legally or illegally, before checks and balances can kick into action.

    Before the Election many could not believe - even in informed circles - that they were getting an Erdogan, a Chavez, or an Idi Amin *, or the implications of electing a career criminal, or a party that had become a Trump Family operation, or the implications of lunatic economic policies or previous outright denial of electoral manipulation.

    The same goes for Trump burning down the rule of law as it applies to him and his Government, and internationally, and his attempts politically to instrumentralise tariffs and the USA's military.

    * He's not at Amin yet, imo - Judges are not yet physically in prison being beaten to a pulp.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,473
    rcs1000 said:

    StillWaters said:

    Fpt @rcs1000 re: politicians who impress

    I’ve had the pleasure (sic) of getting to know many politicians well over the years.

    Those that impressed: Paddy Mayhew, David Trimble, Paddy Ashdown, Norman Fowler, Quintin Hogg, Micky Ancram, John Smith

    Those that stood out on the other side: Cameron, Osborne, Ken Clarke, Michael Heseltine, Tony Blair.

    I met Tony Blair too. He did not impress.

    Ken Clarke I met at the Cambridge Union, where he demonstrated an extraordinary ability to drink alcohol and smoke. He was clearly very smart. But he was like a very smart homeless person, who would never achieve his potential.

    Quentin Hogg I would have loved to have met.
    Agree on Clarke - he was just lazy. Quintin was great - seriously sharp although didn’t tolerate fools and that sometimes alienated people. I got to spend a decent amount of time with him after he retired - he took on himself to educate me in constitutional law. Starting with Cicero vs Cato… in the original…

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    Liam Lawson (5th) ahead of Verstappen (8th) and Tsunoda (18th).

    CHORTLE.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    Another fire!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,708
    StillWaters said:

    rcs1000 said:

    StillWaters said:

    Fpt @rcs1000 re: politicians who impress

    I’ve had the pleasure (sic) of getting to know many politicians well over the years.

    Those that impressed: Paddy Mayhew, David Trimble, Paddy Ashdown, Norman Fowler, Quintin Hogg, Micky Ancram, John Smith

    Those that stood out on the other side: Cameron, Osborne, Ken Clarke, Michael Heseltine, Tony Blair.

    I met Tony Blair too. He did not impress.

    Ken Clarke I met at the Cambridge Union, where he demonstrated an extraordinary ability to drink alcohol and smoke. He was clearly very smart. But he was like a very smart homeless person, who would never achieve his potential.

    Quentin Hogg I would have loved to have met.
    Agree on Clarke - he was just lazy. Quintin was great - seriously sharp although didn’t tolerate fools and that sometimes alienated people. I got to spend a decent amount of time with him after he retired - he took on himself to educate me in constitutional law. Starting with Cicero vs Cato… in the original…
    I very much enjoyed his biography.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,516
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    It was an utter joke, I fixed my gas and elec in January 2022 for two years and thanks to the government intervention I was £400 better off which went to my shoe fund.
    Presumably that funded ‘a’ shoe
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,297
    malcolmg said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I'm trying (and failing) to remember the timeline. Didn't Truss spend the leadership campaign saying that a big energy bailout was unaffordable and wrong, and then unleash a big energy bailout out of nowhere?

    But yes, most of us should have suffered more than we did, which wasn't very much. But electorally, suicidal.

    Is this what the decadence that precedes decline and fall looks like?
    Not sure what planet you live on but my utility bills are 3 times what they were several years ago. Lots of people have no way to afford such increases they are not all dripping with cash.
    Ultimately, tough. As a nation, we are not as rich as we have spent decades pretending we are.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    edited April 4
    Theuniondivvie said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    It was an utter joke, I fixed my gas and elec in January 2022 for two years and thanks to the government intervention I was £400 better off which went to my shoe fund.
    Presumably that funded ‘a’ shoe
    Yup, a buckle on this pair.




  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    edited April 4
    ...
    StillWaters said:

    Fpt @rcs1000 re: politicians who impress

    I’ve had the pleasure (sic) of getting to know many politicians well over the years.

    Those that impressed: Paddy Mayhew, David Trimble, Paddy Ashdown, Norman Fowler, Quintin Hogg, Micky Ancram, John Smith

    Those that stood out on the other side: Cameron, Osborne, Ken Clarke, Michael Heseltine, Tony Blair.

    Has Ancram ever been on anyone else's "impressive" list? I met him once at a customer's premises in Brecon during the 2005 election. He was a perfectly amenable chap, and the sort the Conservatives would do well to recruit these days. But impressive?

    I note only Tories on your "unimpressive" list.😂
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,275
    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Yup, a buckle on this pair.

    Why are they on the wrong feet?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 15,380
    I knew 2 MPs before they became MPs. I thought they were both fairly impressive: intelligent, charismatic, go-getting. But not superhuman or anything. Just people who maybe stood out a little bit more.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,051
    Scott_xP said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Yup, a buckle on this pair.

    Why are they on the wrong feet?
    Optical illusion.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Opposition to free trade has deep roots on the left, so Starmer is perhaps more able to pivot towards Trump than any other recent Prime Minister.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,787
    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    @DKThomp

    A lot of folks want to argue for a future-world that doesn't yet exist, in which the Trump tariffs guide us to a perfect equilibrium for US growth. But the tariff plan announced yesterday does exist. We can read it. It does not make sense and is not defensible on its own terms.

    https://x.com/DKThomp/status/1907918528826741171
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,030
    Mexicanpete said:

    Did we miss this?

    https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/dale-vince-libel-guido-fawkes/

    It was mentioned a few days ago.

    One question that arises is whether in future allegedly libellous content could simply be deleted under the Online Safety Act. Has Nadine Dorries killed the libel industry? Won't anyone think of the lawyers?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 11,339
    To be fair, it is the purpose of these firms to increase their value for their shareholders, and generating a profit is a way of doing that. Nothing wrong with that.

    The question in the header isn't particularly useful, tbh. A better one would be to find out who people will blame most for a rise in prices. For water and energy, I sense that most of the anger is still directed at the private companies rather than the regulator/government - which I disagree with personally. In a market with natural monopolies, it's incumbent on the government to regulate it properly.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 15,756
    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    Trump is indeed very bullish, in the China shop context.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,627
    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,183
    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    Or Starmer's a liar and the idiot Trump believes him
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    edited April 4
    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
  • eekeek Posts: 30,818
    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    Are you a liar if you aren’t clever enough to pick up that it’s a lie?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,708
    Good morning everyone.

    Hmmm - Rule of Law vs 'censorship'.

    It is interesting to see that the long-running EU case against Twitter for failing to manage their platform in accordance with the law is coming to a head. This, if I have it right, dates back to Spring 2023:

    https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6709

    I don't think the UK has an effective regulator for this type of platform - the TRobinsonNewEra account on Twitter still has the 'documentary' for which Tommy Robinson got himself locked up for publishing as its pinned tweet, with Twitter publishing it to the UK jurisdiction.

    On a separate note Twitter has been lax for a very long time on addressing child abuse images:
    https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/elon-musk-twitter-child-exploitation-b2235416.html

    That's eaving aside Musk's attempts to interfere in European politics, when his party has been whinging about a few campaigners going across from the UK - with has been SOP both ways for half a century.

    Personally, I think stronger regulation is indicated. Musk & Co may be treated as being above the law in the USA; I think it is one of the lines European countries need to hold - as is eg the authority of the International Criminal Court which is also under attack.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 56,000
    Scott_xP said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Yup, a buckle on this pair.

    Why are they on the wrong feet?
    Poor quality snob
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,516
    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The US is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    The US is doing something to itself but I don’t think it’s exporting.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    Now you really are just trolling.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    I don't think Trumpski is going to win the Nobel peace prize

    I also don't think he's going to win the economics prize either
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,627
    edited April 4
    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    Bruton is always a complete mystery to me. A couple of oppressive narrow streets with too much traffic, set in a rather dark valley - what's to like?

    For some reason it's been colonised by emigrés from Islington, presumably because it's got a couple of private schools and a train line to London.

    PS What are the Bamford's food businesses - are they part of the JCB empire?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,065
    MattW said:

    Cicero said:

    The stunned silence on the US right after Trump´s Tariff of Misfortune game show performance has been quite remarkable. I think the backlash will take a little while to come, since the scale of the disaster is so immense that it takes a while to grasp it, especially for the knuckle draggers n the GOP congressional delegation.

    However, after the absolute rout across global markets it is pretty clear that Trump is facing a choice: walk back from this disaster or own it.

    I think that the need for "time to sink in" is true about a lot of things Trump. That's one reason why he tries to create facts on the ground, whether legally or illegally, before checks and balances can kick into action.

    Before the Election many could not believe - even in informed circles - that they were getting an Erdogan, a Chavez, or an Idi Amin *, or the implications of electing a career criminal, or a party that had become a Trump Family operation, or the implications of lunatic economic policies or previous outright denial of electoral manipulation.

    The same goes for Trump burning down the rule of law as it applies to him and his Government, and internationally, and his attempts politically to instrumentralise tariffs and the USA's military.

    * He's not at Amin yet, imo - Judges are not yet physically in prison being beaten to a pulp.
    While Trump hs managed to surprise on the downside so far, what no-one can claim, including all his supporters and voters, following the 6th January events, is ignorance about Trump's regard for the constitution, the rule of law or the truth.

    Unless there is intervention of some unpredictable sort (act of God, military, civil opposition), the remaining question is over the degree to which the rule of law and constitution is thrown over.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,708
    edited April 4
    Mexicanpete said:

    Did we miss this?

    https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/dale-vince-libel-guido-fawkes/

    I was aware of the determination from last autumn (?), but it's taken him some time to pay costs.

    Is this the first one Guido has lost? It seems to be a breach in his "offshoring to avoid liability" fortress. The last time I heard I think his company was incorporated in the Caribbean somewhere, where anyone suing for defamation had to stump up £10k up front.

    If that is the setup, then Dale Vince can afford it.

    It's quite interesting that Richard Tice is also involved, and that Dale Vince - against whom Guido made accusations in relation to commentary around Gaza - is framing it as around 'freedom of speech without being defamed by the Right' question.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,349
    edited April 4
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    David, question is why only the UK prices rocketed, every other country had increases but nowhere on the scale the grifters applied here. Most of our woe is government applied due to the crazy pricing system and shit regulator.
    Certainly agree about the regulators. And the obsession with "the market" when the structures were set up has made us peculiarly susceptible to the spot price at any one time. Most people are not at all interested in markets like this which are complicated and boring. What they want are prices that are fixed over the medium period, that are predictable and which they can ignore.
    That the average person just can't be arsed was a spectacular miss by the ideologues of privatisation.

    Edit.
    That people are not in fact "rational actors who will maximise profit" explains why markets were so blindsided by Trump doing exactly what he's been saying he'll do for months.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,989
    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I disagree.

    There is far too much emphasis on 'protecting the poor' at the expense of the average person.

    Its often said that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes.

    Well they're wrong, there's another, the poor.

    No matter how much money is given to them, no matter how many freebies are donated to them, no matter how many opportunities are created for them the poor keep on increasing in numbers.

    Here are the next generation of 'the poor':

    More than half a million young people who are not working or studying have never had a job, an analysis has found.

    Most of those not in education, employment or training (Neet) are also not looking for a job and an increasing number report sickness as the main reason.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/young-people-work-training-benefits-fgdg998tk

    After them will follow most of the SEND kids currently bankrupting local councils.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    I suspect both the Telegraph and the Time Out articles were written by journalists who had never visited the places they were writing about. Cheltenham is not the genteel spa town it once was, and Penarth? Neither a Waitrose nor a branch of Gail's in sight (they closed the Waitrose in nearby Barry a few years back) just itinerant Spectator columnists hiding from "the" COVID.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,627
    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    But to answer my question, do you believe Starmer will be happy?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,627
    eek said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    Are you a liar if you aren’t clever enough to pick up that it’s a lie?
    No, you're just stupid. Stupidity: inherent, unavoidable; lying: proactive, avoidable.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Benpointer said:

    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    But to answer my question, do you believe Starmer will be happy?
    Yes, Britain is in the tier of most favoured countries and our most important service exports to the US are unaffected.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,627
    Mexicanpete said:

    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    I suspect both the Telegraph and the Time Out articles were written by journalists who had never visited the places they were writing about. Cheltenham is not the genteel spa town it once was, and Penarth? Neither a Waitrose nor a branch of Gail's in sight (they closed the Waitrose in nearby Barry a few years back) just itinerant Spectator columnists hiding from "the" COVID.
    Penarth is of course a well-known Covid sanctuary town for Camdenites.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Daveyboy1961 said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    That's easy for you to say...
    That was his point wasnt it? A lot of people were included for whom it was easy to say?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,708
    On tariffs, the BBC have a report on Scotch Whisky.

    Am I right a 10% tariff will be on the wholesale cost as delivered to the USA border, which would be on perhaps half of the retail, so an approx. 5% loading on retail price?

    Is the tariff also on the delivery charge?

    Anthony Wills runs the Kilchoman distillery on the island of Islay and says he feels "deflated" at the prospect of tariffs. "It's a huge blow for the industry," he says.

    "For us personally, it represents 10% of our sales. So it's clearly going to be a big blow, especially with the current economic headwinds that we're all experiencing, we're all going to find this very difficult and very challenging."

    The industry has been hit with US tariffs before, with a 25% levy on single malts back in 2019. The Scottish Whisky Association estimates that for the 18 months the tariffs were in place, the industry lost £600m in sales.

    Mr Wills says he split the cost of the tariff with his US importer so the price would stay the same for their American customers.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq80vyyln40o

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    another_richard said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I disagree.

    There is far too much emphasis on 'protecting the poor' at the expense of the average person.

    Its often said that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes.

    Well they're wrong, there's another, the poor.

    No matter how much money is given to them, no matter how many freebies are donated to them, no matter how many opportunities are created for them the poor keep on increasing in numbers.

    Here are the next generation of 'the poor':

    More than half a million young people who are not working or studying have never had a job, an analysis has found.

    Most of those not in education, employment or training (Neet) are also not looking for a job and an increasing number report sickness as the main reason.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/young-people-work-training-benefits-fgdg998tk

    After them will follow most of the SEND kids currently bankrupting local councils.
    What an absolutely crass post.

    What is your remedy? A cull.

    I agree too many people are reliant on benefits, and that is a culture that needs to be changed, but until that culture is changed, morality suggests we can't let these people starve. That is one of my issues over the cruelty of "Austerity 2.0".
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,275
    Benpointer said:

    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    But to answer my question, do you believe Starmer will be happy?
    Re my earlier report by Sky I would expect Starmer does not find Trump's comments helpful
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,627
    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    But to answer my question, do you believe Starmer will be happy?
    Yes, Britain is in the tier of most favoured countries and our most important service exports to the US are unaffected.
    You're an idiot William. Sorry to be rude but the truth is often painful.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 15,756
    Mexicanpete said:

    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    I suspect both the Telegraph and the Time Out articles were written by journalists who had never visited the places they were writing about. Cheltenham is not the genteel spa town it once was, and Penarth? Neither a Waitrose nor a branch of Gail's in sight (they closed the Waitrose in nearby Barry a few years back) just itinerant Spectator columnists hiding from "the" COVID.
    Most of them are niceish towns. But not really posh. We stayed for a couple of days in Holt last year. Very nice, quite upmarket but not posh posh. Ludlow: nice but not posh. Stamford likewise.

    A better headline would be “pleasant towns it’s worth visiting”.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    I suspect both the Telegraph and the Time Out articles were written by journalists who had never visited the places they were writing about. Cheltenham is not the genteel spa town it once was, and Penarth? Neither a Waitrose nor a branch of Gail's in sight (they closed the Waitrose in nearby Barry a few years back) just itinerant Spectator columnists hiding from "the" COVID.
    Penarth is of course a well-known Covid sanctuary town for Camdenites.
    Yes, there were at least two of them there at the same time, Eadric and SeanT. as I recall.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,784
    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    I suspect both the Telegraph and the Time Out articles were written by journalists who had never visited the places they were writing about. Cheltenham is not the genteel spa town it once was, and Penarth? Neither a Waitrose nor a branch of Gail's in sight (they closed the Waitrose in nearby Barry a few years back) just itinerant Spectator columnists hiding from "the" COVID.
    Penarth is of course a well-known Covid sanctuary town for Camdenites.
    Apart from the Montpellier area, and part of the Promenade, Cheltenham is a dump.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,851
    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    Duh! You really have swallowed the MAGA cult BS. There is NOTHING positive about this for UK, and those that are claiming a "Brexshit dividend" need to realise that we are not part of the negotiating bloc that is most likely to face Trump down and therefore have to supinely grovel to him instead. This is where populism leads; collective stupidity and business and economic illiteracy.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,678
    Mexicanpete said:

    another_richard said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I disagree.

    There is far too much emphasis on 'protecting the poor' at the expense of the average person.

    Its often said that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes.

    Well they're wrong, there's another, the poor.

    No matter how much money is given to them, no matter how many freebies are donated to them, no matter how many opportunities are created for them the poor keep on increasing in numbers.

    Here are the next generation of 'the poor':

    More than half a million young people who are not working or studying have never had a job, an analysis has found.

    Most of those not in education, employment or training (Neet) are also not looking for a job and an increasing number report sickness as the main reason.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/young-people-work-training-benefits-fgdg998tk

    After them will follow most of the SEND kids currently bankrupting local councils.
    What an absolutely crass post.

    What is your remedy? A cull.

    I agree too many people are reliant on benefits, and that is a culture that needs to be changed, but until that culture is changed, morality suggests we can't let these people starve. That is one of my issues over the cruelty of "Austerity 2.0".
    The problem is finding something useful for them to do in a post-industrial economy.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 11,339
    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    But to answer my question, do you believe Starmer will be happy?
    Yes, Britain is in the tier of most favoured countries and our most important service exports to the US are unaffected.
    "Favoured countries" = no trade surplus with the US.

    If - and it's a big if - these tariffs stay in place for the rest of Trump's term (?), it will interesting to see if we start to export more as a result of this relatively advantageous position, and whether the mad formula is dynamic and picks up this change and applies it to the tariff charged on UK goods.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    Duh! You really have swallowed the MAGA cult BS. There is NOTHING positive about this for UK, and those that are claiming a "Brexshit dividend" need to realise that we are not part of the negotiating bloc that is most likely to face Trump down and therefore have to supinely grovel to him instead. This is where populism leads; collective stupidity and business and economic illiteracy.
    The idea that the EU will "face Trump down" on trade rests on the assumption that Trump isn't serious about his stated objectives.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,748
    kle4 said:

    Daveyboy1961 said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    That's easy for you to say...
    That was his point wasnt it? A lot of people were included for whom it was easy to say?
    ...
    ?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Stuartinromford said:

    malcolmg said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    I'm trying (and failing) to remember the timeline. Didn't Truss spend the leadership campaign saying that a big energy bailout was unaffordable and wrong, and then unleash a big energy bailout out of nowhere?

    But yes, most of us should have suffered more than we did, which wasn't very much. But electorally, suicidal.

    Is this what the decadence that precedes decline and fall looks like?
    Not sure what planet you live on but my utility bills are 3 times what they were several years ago. Lots of people have no way to afford such increases they are not all dripping with cash.
    Ultimately, tough. As a nation, we are not as rich as we have spent decades pretending we are.
    Indeed. If the argument is all or most genuinely needed it as they cannot take that hit anymore, then it would naturally follow for me thatcas a country we definitely cannot afford a lot of things and would need to do without.

    Its not about being unsympathetic or that people would not struggle, its how many would and how much, and arguments over whether some woukd have struggled but gotten by versus those for whom it was existential.

    Or more briefly, targeting.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,787
    Benpointer said:

    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    Bruton is always a complete mystery to me. A couple of oppressive narrow streets with too much traffic, set in a rather dark valley - what's to like?

    For some reason it's been colonised by emigrés from Islington, presumably because it's got a couple of private schools and a train line to London.

    PS What are the Bamford's food businesses - are they part of the JCB empire?
    Yes they certainly are. The dynasty started with Dad and then to the family. An 'advisor' to David Cameron.... a seat in the House of Lords .....an everyday tale of English country folk.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,297
    williamglenn said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    Duh! You really have swallowed the MAGA cult BS. There is NOTHING positive about this for UK, and those that are claiming a "Brexshit dividend" need to realise that we are not part of the negotiating bloc that is most likely to face Trump down and therefore have to supinely grovel to him instead. This is where populism leads; collective stupidity and business and economic illiteracy.
    The idea that the EU will "face Trump down" on trade rests on the assumption that Trump isn't serious about his stated objectives.
    The balance of probabilities is that Trump isn't serious about these objectives. Two reasons.

    The boring technical one is that his objectives (fund the government and reduce imports) contradict.

    The fundamental one is that Trump is not, and never has been, a serious individual.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Daveyboy1961 said:

    kle4 said:

    Daveyboy1961 said:

    DavidL said:

    numbertwelve said:

    On topic, I think the finishing sentence is the correct one - people expect the government to be able to stop it.

    We have lived through two extraordinary events in the past few years - Covid and Ukraine - and in both the government stepped in to mitigate the issues through furlough and the energy payments. I am fairly convinced that a lot of people now think the government is able to do this any time there are negative economic outcomes. This has not been helped by the very poor coverage of what all this spending meant long term - the media were poor at questioning it; and the opposition at the time wanted more of it.

    Agree completely. Our complete overreaction in respect of energy bills with the government running in terror of that idiot Martin Lewis in particular did very serious lasting harm to the country and our future wealth. The poor need protected with targeted benefits. The rest of us should have been left to get on with it.
    That's easy for you to say...
    That was his point wasnt it? A lot of people were included for whom it was easy to say?
    ...
    ?
    I dont know how to put it more simply. Your comment seemed to reinforce his point.
  • eekeek Posts: 30,818
    Scott_xP said:

    I don't think Trumpski is going to win the Nobel peace prize

    I also don't think he's going to win the economics prize either

    By providing an actual demonstration on the consequence of tariffs and why they don't work if the Nobel committee cared about the real world he could win it.

    Sadly the Nobel committee is concerned about theories and real world reality usually gets in the way in Economics because the numerous side factors usually override the theory..
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 33,383
    ...
    Roger said:

    Benpointer said:

    Roger said:

    While looking for places to avoid the Bamfords food businesses I came across this.....

    Some odd inclusions and some even odder inclusions

    https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/britains-15-poshest-towns-in-2025-032425

    Bruton is always a complete mystery to me. A couple of oppressive narrow streets with too much traffic, set in a rather dark valley - what's to like?

    For some reason it's been colonised by emigrés from Islington, presumably because it's got a couple of private schools and a train line to London.

    PS What are the Bamford's food businesses - are they part of the JCB empire?
    Yes they certainly are. The dynasty started with Dad and then to the family. An 'advisor' to David Cameron.... a seat in the House of Lords .....an everyday tale of English country folk.
    How will Boris Johnson survive without the food parcels from Lady Bamford?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    williamglenn said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    Benpointer said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    Good morning

    Sky reporting Trump says Keir Starmer is very happy with US tariff treatment

    Also went on to say Trump and his team are very bullish and gone off to Florida and no doubt the golf course

    In response to @Cicero Trump owns this 100%

    Either Trump is a liar or Starmer is an idiot, or both.
    You doubt Trump is a liar? That seems idiotic to me.

    Who on earth other than Trump thinks Starmer is happy to see tariffs slapped on UK exports to the US?
    It's all relative. The UK is now a relatively more advantageous place from which to export to the US than it was last week.
    Duh! You really have swallowed the MAGA cult BS. There is NOTHING positive about this for UK, and those that are claiming a "Brexshit dividend" need to realise that we are not part of the negotiating bloc that is most likely to face Trump down and therefore have to supinely grovel to him instead. This is where populism leads; collective stupidity and business and economic illiteracy.
    The idea that the EU will "face Trump down" on trade rests on the assumption that Trump isn't serious about his stated objectives.
    He might be serious but even Trump does back down or modify things in response to pressure. He's not some uniquely principled person who never alters an action, even if he is incredibly stubborn and self confident.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,398
    Stuartinromford said:

    The balance of probabilities is that Trump isn't serious about these objectives. Two reasons.

    The boring technical one is that his objectives (fund the government and reduce imports) contradict.

    The fundamental one is that Trump is not, and never has been, a serious individual.

    What are his objectives?

    What he actually wants is every World leader to grovel at his feet and offer favours in return for leniency. In fact he claims it has already happened.

    What will actually happen is large trading blocks like the EU will slap him about while the UK watches on from the sidelines.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,297
    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:

    I don't think Trumpski is going to win the Nobel peace prize

    I also don't think he's going to win the economics prize either

    By providing an actual demonstration on the consequence of tariffs and why they don't work if the Nobel committee cared about the real world he could win it.

    Sadly the Nobel committee is concerned about theories and real world reality usually gets in the way in Economics because the numerous side factors usually override the theory..
    As an experiment, it feels more like the ones that the IgNobel judges celebrate.

    Is there a Darwin Award for Economics?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 15,065
    MattW said:

    On tariffs, the BBC have a report on Scotch Whisky.

    Am I right a 10% tariff will be on the wholesale cost as delivered to the USA border, which would be on perhaps half of the retail, so an approx. 5% loading on retail price?

    Is the tariff also on the delivery charge?

    Anthony Wills runs the Kilchoman distillery on the island of Islay and says he feels "deflated" at the prospect of tariffs. "It's a huge blow for the industry," he says.

    "For us personally, it represents 10% of our sales. So it's clearly going to be a big blow, especially with the current economic headwinds that we're all experiencing, we're all going to find this very difficult and very challenging."

    The industry has been hit with US tariffs before, with a 25% levy on single malts back in 2019. The Scottish Whisky Association estimates that for the 18 months the tariffs were in place, the industry lost £600m in sales.

    Mr Wills says he split the cost of the tariff with his US importer so the price would stay the same for their American customers.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq80vyyln40o

    Just wait till they tell him about UK duty rates on whisky. His head will explode.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025