I see everyone is a critic of the indiscriminate slaughter of Gazans now. I wonder if there will be any reflection on the appeasement, selective silences and bothsidesism that got us to this point? (Answers own question: of course there won’t be, you stupid twat)
As always there, we don't have an easy solution. Israel are doing terrible things to the Gazans. Hamas are doing terrible things to the Gazans. The international community doesn't want to intervene because it can't reward either side, and nobody is up for becoming the impartial military presence that gets murdered by Hamas
I’ve not hitherto noticed much reluctance to ‘reward’ Israel with arms, aid, intelligence, political support and allowing them to participate in the cultural rituals of the civilised(sic) west, eg sport, Eurovision etc.
We shouldn't be selling them arms, but I have no objection to them being involved in things like Eurovision. They are a democracy, and the current phase of this war was started by Hamas slaughtering civilians. Its a completely different scenario to Russia's actions in Ukraine and its subsequent bans.
Israel has invaded and is occupying Syrian territory, without any real casus belli. It is regularly breaking international law in the West Bank. You don't have to bring in Gaza to have reasons why the international community might want to disapprove of Israel's actions.
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
You Southerners get fleeced, up in Yorkshire we only had a 29% increase.
And of course Yorkshire water is much superior to poncy Southern water.
Though seriously, I'm surprised Southern got away with a 46.7% increase this year with relatively little kerfuffle.
I am an unabashed free marketeer but the water companies turn me into a Marxist, especially Thames Water.
Your anger is entirely consistent with being a free marketeer. The trouble is utilities simply cannot be a free market in the first place.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby
Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again
That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset
And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
4. Attack business processes that require low value foreign labour that could be replaced by mechanisation. Eliminate the hand car wash and the deliveroo cyclist.
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
The "value" of the water companies is determined by whatever the regulator allows them to stick water up by, and with OFWAT being so supine Thames' issues have given the rest of them an absolute goldmine. The increase should have been capped at cpi inflation and failed water companies bought by the state for a single shiny pound.
While I tend to agree that natural monopolys like water should probably be in state hands, I am also sceptical it would make things any better. The quality of our waterways in the 60's and 70's before privatisation was worse than currently by a long shot. Simple reason its easier to cut investment there than it is to cut investment in for example the NHS
For a start, tens of billions in dividends would not have been funnelled off overseas. Which is likely to be repeated all over again, if Thames is surrendered to KKR.
Even if you accept the management of the assets would be no different, having it in public ownership would mean cheaper borrowing costs (they're currently paying 10% interest on short term loans), and any profits being retained by the UK.
Indeed you could contract out the management of the assets by tender, on a time limited basis.
You could also get rid of OFWAT completely.
It's not really the dividends, it was the borrowing that they siphoned off which is the big problem. Borrow £bns "for investment (LOL)" on the back of the revenue stream (water bills), take the £bns as dividends. Same robbing model as BHS, Man U, etc etc If the water company was still nationalised either the borrowing wouldn't have occurred or it would have been spent on the infrastructure, there's no 3m diameter mains supply to Private Equity.
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
You Southerners get fleeced, up in Yorkshire we only had a 29% increase.
And of course Yorkshire water is much superior to poncy Southern water.
Though seriously, I'm surprised Southern got away with a 46.7% increase this year with relatively little kerfuffle.
Was southern at a particularly low base ? Looking at my bill
Per day the standing charge is £0.4244 (10.166p Water, 7.277p waste, 4.666p highways, 20.333p band 3 house or £154.92 annualised
Water is then charged at £1.8195 per ton and 95% * £1.3008 for waste = £3.055 per m^3.
That was before Severn Trent's increases as I requested a bill to April, so I assume they'll be 22% higher or whatnot now.
I see everyone is a critic of the indiscriminate slaughter of Gazans now. I wonder if there will be any reflection on the appeasement, selective silences and bothsidesism that got us to this point? (Answers own question: of course there won’t be, you stupid twat)
I'm not in favour of the indiscriminate slaughter of anyone, anywhere in the world, but - personally - I find Israel/Palestine and Gaza/West Bank stuff boring.
I only keep quiet because you get abuse if you don't echo along. But I'm not especially interested.
Yes, I rarely comment on it for the same reason. The Hamas attack and kidnappings were a shocking act of terrorism but the Israeli response is openly genocidal.
It touches so many culture war issues that it soaks up far too much attention, while Sudan, or the Eastern Congo get ignored.
The Israeli response is openly genocidal. Hamas are also openly genocidal. (Yes, that's bothsideism. But it's also true.)
The issue is that we, in the west, have generally supported Israel, for many complex reasons, including historical ones. We have not directly supported Hamas. Now the Israeli government are being openly genocidal, the question is how long we can continue to support them.
I don't think it is a question of us having to support them or they will get crushed by Hamas. But the Israeli government do need to understand that we have zero support for the way they are acting. In fact, that we condemn it.
Peter Tatchell stands for millions of us who don't demonstrate against the wickedness of all sides and in support of babies and children, and ordinary people everywhere.
Bt the way, loads more ordinary people (including babies and children) are being crushed and killed in Sudan than Israel/Gaza and no-one in the west seems to care much.
We know why Israel uniquely gets the attention - antisemitism.
I think that's part of it. I don't think that's all of it. There are greater social and cultural links to Israel and Palestine, more historical links, and it's also easier for journalists to go to.
But, yes, so much in Africa gets relatively ignored. Rwanda invaded DRC and it barely got any attention.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby
Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again
That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset
And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
The French probably watched that video of starmer in the boxing gym and fell about laughing and said “mon dieu, why are we worried, il est un gaylord avec les boots de ponce”
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby
Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again
That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset
And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
Can we unpack this a little? You do understand that the existing fish deal is not "us giving away all our fish" and getting back "literally nothing".
We annually negotiate fishing access into EEA waters and vice versa. We catch their fish because that's we like to eat. They catch our fish because thats what they like to eat. And the fish we catch in our own waters we largely sell to them because we don't want to eat it.
That is the reality when you wipe the froth from your mouth. The existing Boris deal made it difficult and expensive for us to sell our fish. Read the articles from fish industry people. Seriously big operators have folded in the last few years because the Boris deal made it financially non-viable. The new deal removes those barriers.
I suspect your problem isn't fish - which be honest you don't actually understand - and is more "paying money and taking EU law again".
I have no doubt that we will be paying money. But again, in the real world we are already paying money into a bonfire racking up huge costs trying to make the BTOM actually function. Paying the EU money to save more money may be an ideological objection in principle, but it certainly isn't "no money now" vs "money then"
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
You Southerners get fleeced, up in Yorkshire we only had a 29% increase.
And of course Yorkshire water is much superior to poncy Southern water.
Though seriously, I'm surprised Southern got away with a 46.7% increase this year with relatively little kerfuffle.
Full of reet good Yorkshire sewage rather than that effete southern muck.
Are you seriously suggesting that lentils, couscous, Waitrose and Gails products produce worse sewage than pie and chips?
Which person would you want to stand down wind off considering pulses have a reputation for producing gaseous emissions from the average human
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
...as is our Leon. For less hysterical commentary, there's the Economist: This narrative of Brexit betrayal is an absurd exaggeration. Sir Keir has stuck firmly to his red lines of not joining the single market or customs union and not accepting free movement of people. Even after his “reset”, this is what was once termed a hard (not a soft) Brexit. He has conceded more than he may have wished on fisheries, but there was never much chance of taking back full control of British waters, not least because British fishers export over 70% of what they catch to the EU. As for being a rule-taker, that is merely the price that countries wishing to sell into the EU market must pay. The EU takes over 40% of British exports, twice as much as America and 20 times as much as India (the two other countries with which Sir Keir has recently struck tariff or trade deals). And a limited youth-experience deal is a long way from the old system of free movement of people across Europe.
A more reasonable conclusion would be that, given the constraints of his red lines, Sir Keir has got about as good a deal with the EU as he could have done. It may not have a large economic impact, but it should bring some financial benefits to hard-pressed Britons. It will remove some of the irritations created by Brexit.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby
Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again
That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset
And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
Leon and Casion embracing their inner Lord Frosts.
It is perfectly possible for the Lib Dems to gain more seats that the conservatives at the next election but in those circumstances I would expect them to remain the third party behind Reform and Labour
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby
Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again
That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset
And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
"We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung.... I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
The "value" of the water companies is determined by whatever the regulator allows them to stick water up by, and with OFWAT being so supine Thames' issues have given the rest of them an absolute goldmine. The increase should have been capped at cpi inflation and failed water companies bought by the state for a single shiny pound.
While I tend to agree that natural monopolys like water should probably be in state hands, I am also sceptical it would make things any better. The quality of our waterways in the 60's and 70's before privatisation was worse than currently by a long shot. Simple reason its easier to cut investment there than it is to cut investment in for example the NHS
For a start, tens of billions in dividends would not have been funnelled off overseas. Which is likely to be repeated all over again, if Thames is surrendered to KKR.
Even if you accept the management of the assets would be no different, having it in public ownership would mean cheaper borrowing costs (they're currently paying 10% interest on short term loans), and any profits being retained by the UK.
Indeed you could contract out the management of the assets by tender, on a time limited basis.
You could also get rid of OFWAT completely.
It's not really the dividends, it was the borrowing that they siphoned off which is the big problem. Borrow £bns "for investment (LOL)" on the back of the revenue stream (water bills), take the £bns as dividends. Same robbing model as BHS, Man U, etc etc If the water company was still nationalised either the borrowing wouldn't have occurred or it would have been spent on the infrastructure, there's no 3m diameter mains supply to Private Equity.
Dividends are paid on commercial debt as well as equity. They took money every which way, while the regulator did nothing.
But you could cut through 95% of the complexity simply by having it publicly owned.
Leon was looking for an excuse to visit Wuhan. This might be a pretty good one.
Trying China's robotaxi in Wuhan https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/business/companies/20250521/trying-chinas-robotaxi-in-wuhan ..On May 13, at the Wuhan headquarters of Huawei-backed startup Huarizixing, vice president Ren Xuefeng demonstrated the company’s smart road technology — a key pillar of China’s autonomous strategy. Their system connects vehicles, infrastructure and cloud services, enabling real-time sharing of road conditions. At 125 kilometers of roads in Wuhan, Huarizixing’s systems can now calculate traffic signal changes, helping vehicles decide whether to proceed through intersections without stopping.
Ren explained, “With our in-vehicle terminals and city traffic data, we can not only support navigation but even control the timing of traffic lights. It’s all made possible through public-private cooperation and government funding.”
Nearby, software engineer Dong Yong of Guangting Information Technology Company described an office complex housing six or seven firms specializing in autonomous driving. He called it “the world’s first industrial ecosystem for smart connected vehicles,” where companies openly collaborate and share resources. “About 80 percent of technical issues can be solved internally here,” he said.
This collaborative environment is backed by a deep talent pool. Wuhan is home to 42 universities, including Wuhan University and Huazhong University of Science and Technology, as well as 56 major research institutes. With over 300,000 technical experts and more than 800,000 university students, the region offers one of China’s strongest concentrations of automotive and engineering talent.
“Beijing and Shanghai may have more general talent, but when it comes to automotive engineering, Wuhan is unmatched," Ren noted...
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby
Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again
That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset
And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
Leon and Casion embracing their inner Lord Frosts.
How did he do ?
To be fair to him, he's since admitted that he has "face blindness", prosopagnosia, so he had no idea who he was talking to throughout the negotiations.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
...as is our Leon. For less hysterical commentary, there's the Economist: This narrative of Brexit betrayal is an absurd exaggeration. Sir Keir has stuck firmly to his red lines of not joining the single market or customs union and not accepting free movement of people. Even after his “reset”, this is what was once termed a hard (not a soft) Brexit. He has conceded more than he may have wished on fisheries, but there was never much chance of taking back full control of British waters, not least because British fishers export over 70% of what they catch to the EU. As for being a rule-taker, that is merely the price that countries wishing to sell into the EU market must pay. The EU takes over 40% of British exports, twice as much as America and 20 times as much as India (the two other countries with which Sir Keir has recently struck tariff or trade deals). And a limited youth-experience deal is a long way from the old system of free movement of people across Europe.
A more reasonable conclusion would be that, given the constraints of his red lines, Sir Keir has got about as good a deal with the EU as he could have done. It may not have a large economic impact, but it should bring some financial benefits to hard-pressed Britons. It will remove some of the irritations created by Brexit.
I think removing some of the irritations of Brexit may be the most significant political impact on individuals here.
Mr Starmer's Communications Programme, when it appears, needs to keep reminding those persuadable voters of what it was like before.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby
Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again
That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset
And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
Leon and Casion embracing their inner Lord Frosts.
How did he do ?
One has to be tough with these foreign jonnies, etc.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
...as is our Leon. For less hysterical commentary, there's the Economist: This narrative of Brexit betrayal is an absurd exaggeration. Sir Keir has stuck firmly to his red lines of not joining the single market or customs union and not accepting free movement of people. Even after his “reset”, this is what was once termed a hard (not a soft) Brexit. He has conceded more than he may have wished on fisheries, but there was never much chance of taking back full control of British waters, not least because British fishers export over 70% of what they catch to the EU. As for being a rule-taker, that is merely the price that countries wishing to sell into the EU market must pay. The EU takes over 40% of British exports, twice as much as America and 20 times as much as India (the two other countries with which Sir Keir has recently struck tariff or trade deals). And a limited youth-experience deal is a long way from the old system of free movement of people across Europe.
A more reasonable conclusion would be that, given the constraints of his red lines, Sir Keir has got about as good a deal with the EU as he could have done. It may not have a large economic impact, but it should bring some financial benefits to hard-pressed Britons. It will remove some of the irritations created by Brexit.
I think removing some of the irritations of Brexit may be the most significant political impact on individuals here.
Mr Starmer's Communications Programme, when it appears, needs to keep reminding those persuadable voters of what it was like before.
It maybe some here have irritations, frankly though for the majority of people they probably don't see any difference to their day to day lives from before when we were in the eu to the current day. I know it has made bugger all difference to me and most I know.
Amusingly I do have one friend who is very vocal about how his right to work in the eu has been stripped from him and its a total calumny but as I said to him "mate you are 62 you never expressed any desire to work in the eu before brexit, hell of the 40 odd years I have known you judging by the 15 years you have spent during that time claiming benefits you have shown little desire to work in the uk either"
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
...as is our Leon. For less hysterical commentary, there's the Economist: This narrative of Brexit betrayal is an absurd exaggeration. Sir Keir has stuck firmly to his red lines of not joining the single market or customs union and not accepting free movement of people. Even after his “reset”, this is what was once termed a hard (not a soft) Brexit. He has conceded more than he may have wished on fisheries, but there was never much chance of taking back full control of British waters, not least because British fishers export over 70% of what they catch to the EU. As for being a rule-taker, that is merely the price that countries wishing to sell into the EU market must pay. The EU takes over 40% of British exports, twice as much as America and 20 times as much as India (the two other countries with which Sir Keir has recently struck tariff or trade deals). And a limited youth-experience deal is a long way from the old system of free movement of people across Europe.
A more reasonable conclusion would be that, given the constraints of his red lines, Sir Keir has got about as good a deal with the EU as he could have done. It may not have a large economic impact, but it should bring some financial benefits to hard-pressed Britons. It will remove some of the irritations created by Brexit.
I think removing some of the irritations of Brexit may be the most significant political impact on individuals here.
Mr Starmer's Communications Programme, when it appears, needs to keep reminding those persuadable voters of what it was like before.
The bit that worries me is what AEP was saying about possible regulation on new tech agriculture like lab meat and other proteins. We need to keep nibble on technology or be left far behind by China on the new stuff. Huge mistake if he does sign away this.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain
The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years
What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.
What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?
What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.
Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
...as is our Leon. For less hysterical commentary, there's the Economist: This narrative of Brexit betrayal is an absurd exaggeration. Sir Keir has stuck firmly to his red lines of not joining the single market or customs union and not accepting free movement of people. Even after his “reset”, this is what was once termed a hard (not a soft) Brexit. He has conceded more than he may have wished on fisheries, but there was never much chance of taking back full control of British waters, not least because British fishers export over 70% of what they catch to the EU. As for being a rule-taker, that is merely the price that countries wishing to sell into the EU market must pay. The EU takes over 40% of British exports, twice as much as America and 20 times as much as India (the two other countries with which Sir Keir has recently struck tariff or trade deals). And a limited youth-experience deal is a long way from the old system of free movement of people across Europe.
A more reasonable conclusion would be that, given the constraints of his red lines, Sir Keir has got about as good a deal with the EU as he could have done. It may not have a large economic impact, but it should bring some financial benefits to hard-pressed Britons. It will remove some of the irritations created by Brexit.
I think removing some of the irritations of Brexit may be the most significant political impact on individuals here.
Mr Starmer's Communications Programme, when it appears, needs to keep reminding those persuadable voters of what it was like before.
It maybe some here have irritations, frankly though for the majority of people they probably don't see any difference to their day to day lives from before when we were in the eu to the current day. I know it has made bugger all difference to me and most I know.
Amusingly I do have one friend who is very vocal about how his right to work in the eu has been stripped from him and its a total calumny but as I said to him "mate you are 62 you never expressed any desire to work in the eu before brexit, hell of the 40 odd years I have known you judging by the 15 years you have spent during that time claiming benefits you have shown little desire to work in the uk either"
The pet travel world is delighted - just rather too many people thinking the changes come in straight away.
To save you listening to an interview with last year's winner, Tristan Kirk of the London Evening Standard (or whatever it is called now) for his work on the Single Justice Procedure, and Ian Hislop's jokes, the winners are the Guardian's Butler and Halliday for their reporting on the carer's allowance scandal.
The shortlist was:-
Charlie Brinkhurst-Cuff The Guardian/Reuters Institute Out of Sight: Missing People campaign Brinkhurst-Cuff movingly told the story of Fiona Holm’s disappearance, asking why it was so overlooked. She supplemented her reporting with a wider investigation into how the media covers missing people.
Patrick Butler & Josh Halliday The Guardian The carer’s allowance scandal Vulnerable carers were taken to court for accidentally claiming carer’s allowance while working part-time – even when some of them had reported their earnings to the DWP. Labour has now set up an independent review.
Laura Hughes Financial Times Lead poisoning In this deeply reported investigation into the effects of lead in paint and in the soil, Hughes asked a provocative question: will lead exposure one day be seen as a scandal on the level of asbestos?
Aaron Walawalkar & Harriet Clugston Liberty Investigates in partnership with Sky News, Metro and The Guardian Inside UK universities’ Gaza protest “crackdown” The investigation unit at the human rights charity looked at British universities’ harsh measures against pro-Palestinian protests and activism on campus, and the institutions’ close cooperation with police.
Jim Waterson LondonCentric Lime bikes and broken legs Waterson’s Substack newsletter uncovered a spate of broken legs caused by the heavy frames of Lime electronic bikes falling on their riders. Who was regulating this Californian company?
Abi Whistance The Liverpool Post Investigation into the Big Help Project Whistance’s four-part investigation for the Liverpool Post newsletter exposed a housing charity that left residents of its homes living in dire conditions. https://www.private-eye.co.uk/paul-foot-award
Interviews with each of the candidates can be found on the Private Eye YouTube channel (and other podcast platforms are available).
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
It is perfectly possible for the Lib Dems to gain more seats that the conservatives at the next election but in those circumstances I would expect them to remain the third party behind Reform and Labour
First, as pointed out in the Kellner and Coates links, a move to the right risks shedding votes on the left.
But more important is that even without moving right, attacking Reform aids the Conservative Party more than it helps Labour.
Perhaps Starmer's advisors are targeting a sweet spot where they neatly split the Con/Reform vote into 2 inefficient blocks? I'm joking, I think they're just reacting in panic.
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
They may well publish monthly inflation as well however the 3.5% is annual
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
They may well publish monthly inflation as well however the 3.5% is annual
And frankly I don't see considering the annual percentage rises for everything I quoted I don't see how they get as low as 3.5%. Nor will most people looking at their outgoings, I suspect most have always been suspicious of these headline inflation figures as they can see the bills rising far more than them was my point
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
They may well publish monthly inflation as well however the 3.5% is annual
Indeed it is. My comment above explains why it has gone up so much. I think the monthly rate was 0.3% last May, so if prices rise by the same amount this month, then the annual rate will stabilise next month.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Farage, as far as I know, has never once in his long career engaged with reality to propose a practical solution to a real problem. It is not his way of doing things. This doesn't seem to be doing him any harm regrettably
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
A very definite yes. It would be a sad day for the U.K. for a party as awful as the Lib Dem’s to do so well. A party of cosy, Home Counties, NIMBYs with no answers to any of the problems the nation faces. Just more of the same and protecting entrenched wealth and privilege
The new conservatives.
Morning love! Glad we've got your attention!
Like Reform you’ll get more now you are rising in the polls and will you survive the scrutiny ?
You always go,on that Reform have no answers to problems in areas like where I live. Red wall, left behind, etc etc.
What exactly do the Lib Dem’s offer us ? I cannot see anything. Their offer seems totally skewed towards the Home Counties and the middle,class.
We’re invisible to them. Yet our council was run by a Lib Dem until recently.
Lib Dem policy positions include radically more regional and local devolution, planning reform that allows for more not less development where it’s needed, a major overhaul of the social care system and investment in transport infrastructure (including, famously, fixing potholes). Plus some silly populist ideas on international tax which don’t add up but are certainly not designed to attract the Home Counties.
I know Taz isn’t likely to switch vote to the LDs anytime soon, but I wouldn’t want any floating voters to think the party platform is nimbyism plus Gail’s bakeries on every high street as seems to be the populist right wing stereotype.
Well if it was a Choice of Britain First and Lib Dem I’d be there to vote Lib Dem when the polls open.
All of the above are just words and really the sort of stuff you hear from oppositions that never get implemented when they see power.
What, concrete, is their offer to the red wall and Reform areas. Davey talks a lot about rejecting Farage’s ‘policies of division and hate’ but this just strikes me as fluffing his Home Counties support as there’s nothing concrete for areas like this one to take votes from Reform
A serious question, @Taz . How do you evaluate the Grey Zone around Reform?
For example, where do you draw red lines around groups such as Britain First, Patriotic Alternative etc - there now being Reform Councillors who are in relationship with them?
That I think is one of the matters the party will have to deal with. They have a number of factions in their Councillors and activist-base, and are being publicly targeted by such groups for infiltration.
Here's a piece in the Telegraph from this week, with some questions - Tommy Robinson support, "demolish Mosques", and so on. https://archive.ph/EyWe4
(FWIW I think the Telegraph have a few dilemmas now offering blind support for Reform; they will need to nuance it. I expect them to reject particular 'crass' proposals, whilst supporting a nativist position.)
For one comparison, a few years ago I would vote for Ashfield Independents, but their Deputy Leader has committed fairly serious criminal offences involving endangering the public and perjury (driving down the traffic calmed High Street at 60mph+, trying to persuade the police on 999 that his innocent neighbour was attacking him with a knife) and he is still in post and standing for Election, so they have completely lost me.
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
They may well publish monthly inflation as well however the 3.5% is annual
And frankly I don't see considering the annual percentage rises for everything I quoted I don't see how they get as low as 3.5%. Nor will most people looking at their outgoings, I suspect most have always been suspicious of these headline inflation figures as they can see the bills rising far more than them was my point
CPIH is 4.1% which includes council tax and is more weighted towards housing (Consumer price index housing)
Core CPIH (CPIH excluding energy, food, alcohol and tobacco) rose by 4.5% in the 12 months to April 2025, up from 4.2% in the 12 months to March; the CPIH goods annual rate rose from 0.6% to 1.7%, while the CPIH services annual rate rose from 5.4% to 5.8%.
As I said in the previous thread the internals of the 3.5% are about as ugly as you can get if you're Rachel Reeves. Whilst the post covid inflation fundamentals were very much out of the government's control (We don't control international container and oil prices) this particular number very much is of the government's own making so Bailey will be listening to the Huw Pills and Catherine Manns rather than Swati Dinghra and keeping rates higher than they otherwise might have been.
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
They may well publish monthly inflation as well however the 3.5% is annual
And frankly I don't see considering the annual percentage rises for everything I quoted I don't see how they get as low as 3.5%. Nor will most people looking at their outgoings, I suspect most have always been suspicious of these headline inflation figures as they can see the bills rising far more than them was my point
That's because you don't buy enough virtual reality headsets, the newest addition to the CPI basket of goods. Part 349 in our series, all economic statistics are rubbish.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Farage, as far as I know, has never once in his long career engaged with reality to propose a practical solution to a real problem. It is not his way of doing things. This doesn't seem to be doing him any harm regrettably
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.
Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?
It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
The main concession from the EU is the Home Office data stuff plus cold meat. The government doesn't really seem to be selling the former does it.
Just relying on the 'we've done a deal' messaging is oddly reminiscent of the Tories obsession with new trade deals after Brexit e.g Australia.
The agreement on foods is far more beneficial to the UK than the EU. To ignore that as a benefit of the deal is not to analyse it seriously.
Because now we get to smother our nascent biotechnology industry by handing away all our regulatory powers and democratic control and just blindly sign up to whatever regulations the EU create, whether we think they're a good idea or not?
Isn't the ability to hand "away all our regulatory powers and democratic control and just blindly sign up to whatever regulations the EU create" a Brexit freedom? Otherwise we would just have had to accept it.
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
They may well publish monthly inflation as well however the 3.5% is annual
And frankly I don't see considering the annual percentage rises for everything I quoted I don't see how they get as low as 3.5%. Nor will most people looking at their outgoings, I suspect most have always been suspicious of these headline inflation figures as they can see the bills rising far more than them was my point
CPIH is 4.1% which includes council tax and is more weighted towards housing (Consumer price index housing)
Core CPIH (CPIH excluding energy, food, alcohol and tobacco) rose by 4.5% in the 12 months to April 2025, up from 4.2% in the 12 months to March; the CPIH goods annual rate rose from 0.6% to 1.7%, while the CPIH services annual rate rose from 5.4% to 5.8%.
As I said in the previous thread the internals of the 3.5% are about as ugly as you can get if you're Rachel Reeves. Whilst the post covid inflation fundamentals were very much out of the government's control (We don't control international container and oil prices) this particular number very much is of the government's own making so Bailey will be listening to the Huw Pills and Catherine Manns rather than Swati Dinghra and keeping rates higher than they otherwise might have been.
It's quite possible that there will be no further base rate cuts in 2025 in both UK and USA
High inflation on top of everything else is Worst Case Scenario for Labour
Could see them follow the Tories under 20%?
Surprised the inflation figure wasn't higher given the hammering I have had from every single supplier to the house this spring e.g. water up 17% FFS!!!
Average is 26%. So you've done ok.
Southern Water: 46.7% increase. (Bastards)
Our increase from Northumbrian is around 29% over five years with 25% in the first year, bastards.
Mine was up by about 25%, but that's only £4 a month. Compared with gas and electric I don't think it's a big component of inflation metrics
Hmmm rents rose on average by 7.8% Water by 25% Gas and electic by 6% Council tax by 5% Food by 3.3% Clothing by 10.6% buses by 50% trains (outside london) by 4.6%
We are expected however to believe that inflation is only 3.5% despite the fact the only one of these figures under 3.5% only accounts on average 11.6% of spending for most families.
Does not compute
Petrol, eating out, clothing etc have either grown very slowly or actually fallen. The figure quoted is also relative to 12 months ago - it's not an annualised month-on-month, which would be much bigger (15%).
petrol I will give you however clothing was in the stats I gave which is at 10.6%, however while petrol may have fallen the cost of car insurance has risen by 34% so unconvinced that doesnt swallow the petrol savings.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
They publish monthly inflation too. Last month prices rose by 1.2% as opposed to 0.3% in April last year, which has just rolled off the annual headline rate
They may well publish monthly inflation as well however the 3.5% is annual
Indeed it is. My comment above explains why it has gone up so much. I think the monthly rate was 0.3% last May, so if prices rise by the same amount this month, then the annual rate will stabilise next month.
Just doing a quick calculation from this time last year
Rent+ council tax + water + power +internet+ phone + food = 2156
Currently
Rent + council tax + water + power + internet + phone+ food = 2472
An inflation rate for me of 14%
splitting it down to food/ bills
Last year food was about 20.8% This year its 20.22% as I have economised somewhat to make the money last till the end of the month
So most of that inflation is unavoidable for me. My essentials if you exclude food the inflation rate is 14.12%.
My food inflation rate is 16.66% despite substituting some stuff for own brand etc
(Yes I know my food is excessive compared to most, but hey got to have some luxuries in life)
Note no transport in their as I mostly walk and don't need to commute to work which also relieves the pressure to buy new clothes a lot of the time
So given the unavoidable stuff is at 14% and accounts for about 80% of what I spend how is the inflation rate 3.5%?
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Farage, as far as I know, has never once in his long career engaged with reality to propose a practical solution to a real problem. It is not his way of doing things. This doesn't seem to be doing him any harm regrettably
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
Sarah Pochin (winner of Runcorn) was just on Woman's Hour. She was excellent - really worth a listen. She gave a simple (simplistic?) practical policy - send 10,000 foreign prisoners home instead of letting wife beaters out early. It was one of the most accessible performances of a politician I can remember, hitting numerous hot spots and not coming across as either a nutter or a racist. I still hope she loses the next general election horribly though.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Regardless of what political parties want to do borders are going to tighten over the next few decades because there is incoming migration wants driven by climate change that are just unsustainable for countries which are the target of that migration. Note here I am not even assuming the targets will be western countries as it could well be that a lot of northern europe enters a new ice age due to the collapse of the gulf stream and its us wanting to move to africa....the estimates of climate driven migration being in the order of several hundreds of millions
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
They don't expect blowback because they expect to win all future elections, all the usual trickery but x 10, and it's not like the DOJ, courts, or Congress will be doing much to stop GOP malfeasance.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
They don't expect blowback because they expect to win all future elections, all the usual trickery but x 10, and it's not like the DOJ, courts, or Congress will be doing much to stop GOP malfeasance.
Federal crimes which will evaporate on the last day of Trump's reign.
Ten years ago, after the Lib-Dem meltdown at the 2015 general election, even the mere suggestion of the Lib-Dems getting more seats that the Tories would have seemed mad but now, who knows?
Just goes to show how frenetic British politics has become since 2010.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. Otherwise the enduring lesson will be that you get handsomely rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Rochdale's post was pretty considered , overall, there, I would say.
Bilbao is a fantastic city with the Guggenheim museum, the Michelin-starred restaurants, and a region with a great history of players and managers. And yet a few idiots want to do this, rather than enjoy everything that Bilbao offers.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Farage, as far as I know, has never once in his long career engaged with reality to propose a practical solution to a real problem. It is not his way of doing things. This doesn't seem to be doing him any harm regrettably
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
Sarah Pochin (winner of Runcorn) was just on Woman's Hour. She was excellent - really worth a listen. She gave a simple (simplistic?) practical policy - send 10,000 foreign prisoners home instead of letting wife beaters out early. It was one of the most accessible performances of a politician I can remember, hitting numerous hot spots and not coming across as either a nutter or a racist. I still hope she loses the next general election horribly though.
She was a good pick for them, not least because it was looking about male on their little bit of the benches.
I saw this comment on social media and think it’s spot on .
“Moderates can never suppress the far-right by adopting their policies because the far-right will forever shift their policies to whatever outflanks moderates.
All it achieves is legitimising far-right narratives, artificially shifting policy rightwards & facilitating radicalisation towards fascism.”
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
They don't expect blowback because they expect to win all future elections, all the usual trickery but x 10, and it's not like the DOJ, courts, or Congress will be doing much to stop GOP malfeasance.
You know who else thought there would be a thousand year Reich...
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Farage, as far as I know, has never once in his long career engaged with reality to propose a practical solution to a real problem. It is not his way of doing things. This doesn't seem to be doing him any harm regrettably
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
Sarah Pochin (winner of Runcorn) was just on Woman's Hour. She was excellent - really worth a listen. She gave a simple (simplistic?) practical policy - send 10,000 foreign prisoners home instead of letting wife beaters out early. It was one of the most accessible performances of a politician I can remember, hitting numerous hot spots and not coming across as either a nutter or a racist. I still hope she loses the next general election horribly though.
Having foreign nationals serve their sentence in their home country makes sense on a lot of levels. Of course to actually implement that you need to have reciprocal agreements with foreign countries - a point which morons don't want to accept as it rather challenges the "why can't we just send the forrin home" narrative.
Then again, some foreign countries may be seen as a softer touch. And back when we had prison capacity we used to get media panics about people "escaping justice" by not spending decades rotting in a cell here.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
You know best I suppose. But going from telling everyone you’ve been going through mental health problems that you need to fix to calling people morons and twats whilst generally sounding angry in three days make you appear like someone suffering with poor mental health.
Another interesting political dilemma for RefUK run County Councils.
3 days ago: "Reform UK launches war on LTNs: Nigel Farage's party will axe hated green roads schemes in all 10 of its newly-won council authorities" * 2 hours ago: "Reform UK fulfils pledge to scrap LTNs in its council areas as none exist." **
That's an artefact of engaging policy mouth without putting brain into gear, and indulging in superficial culture wars.
Control of through traffic by estate layout, including the definitive "modal filters" such as cul-de-sacs, has been a fixed feature of UK estate planning since at least the 1930s. My dad laid out areas of them across my town in the 1960s when he was with the Council.
Reform won't be opening these up, because that is where their voters live, and even people who demand the right to drive down other people's streets always want the benefits for themselves.
They now need something else to add to the shouting campaign, or risk wrecking their own support base. A political opportunity for opponents to write to local papers asking "will Reform be opening up all the cul-de-sacs as through roads in X area?"
at least one still undisclosed effort out of Lockheed Martin
We (the British) are seriously behind in this respect
The UK should have, at least, got observer status on EuroDrone like Japan and India. The name would inflame Fukkers though so it's probably not viable.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
You know best I suppose. But going from telling everyone you’ve been going through mental health problems that you need to fix to calling people morons and twats whilst generally sounding angry in three days make you appear like someone suffering with poor mental health.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Farage, as far as I know, has never once in his long career engaged with reality to propose a practical solution to a real problem. It is not his way of doing things. This doesn't seem to be doing him any harm regrettably
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
Sarah Pochin (winner of Runcorn) was just on Woman's Hour. She was excellent - really worth a listen. She gave a simple (simplistic?) practical policy - send 10,000 foreign prisoners home instead of letting wife beaters out early. It was one of the most accessible performances of a politician I can remember, hitting numerous hot spots and not coming across as either a nutter or a racist. I still hope she loses the next general election horribly though.
She was a good pick for them, not least because it was looking about male on their little bit of the benches.
And she's a classic tory, which reinforces the idea Reform is the new home for people of that political identity.
Is it just me that is upset that other things get a month or a week but sex merely a day....no wonder fertility rates are down....maybe a national orgy month would be an idea
To save you listening to an interview with last year's winner, Tristan Kirk of the London Evening Standard (or whatever it is called now) for his work on the Single Justice Procedure, and Ian Hislop's jokes, the winners are the Guardian's Butler and Halliday for their reporting on the carer's allowance scandal.
The shortlist was:-
Charlie Brinkhurst-Cuff The Guardian/Reuters Institute Out of Sight: Missing People campaign Brinkhurst-Cuff movingly told the story of Fiona Holm’s disappearance, asking why it was so overlooked. She supplemented her reporting with a wider investigation into how the media covers missing people.
Patrick Butler & Josh Halliday The Guardian The carer’s allowance scandal Vulnerable carers were taken to court for accidentally claiming carer’s allowance while working part-time – even when some of them had reported their earnings to the DWP. Labour has now set up an independent review.
Laura Hughes Financial Times Lead poisoning In this deeply reported investigation into the effects of lead in paint and in the soil, Hughes asked a provocative question: will lead exposure one day be seen as a scandal on the level of asbestos?
Aaron Walawalkar & Harriet Clugston Liberty Investigates in partnership with Sky News, Metro and The Guardian Inside UK universities’ Gaza protest “crackdown” The investigation unit at the human rights charity looked at British universities’ harsh measures against pro-Palestinian protests and activism on campus, and the institutions’ close cooperation with police.
Jim Waterson LondonCentric Lime bikes and broken legs Waterson’s Substack newsletter uncovered a spate of broken legs caused by the heavy frames of Lime electronic bikes falling on their riders. Who was regulating this Californian company?
Abi Whistance The Liverpool Post Investigation into the Big Help Project Whistance’s four-part investigation for the Liverpool Post newsletter exposed a housing charity that left residents of its homes living in dire conditions. https://www.private-eye.co.uk/paul-foot-award
Interviews with each of the candidates can be found on the Private Eye YouTube channel (and other podcast platforms are available).
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
You know best I suppose. But going from telling everyone you’ve been going through mental health problems that you need to fix to calling people morons and twats whilst generally sounding angry in three days make you appear like someone suffering with poor mental health.
Leon's in a very bad way then.
I've been like this since I was about 5, so I must have learned some coping mechanisms
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
You know best I suppose. But going from telling everyone you’ve been going through mental health problems that you need to fix to calling people morons and twats whilst generally sounding angry in three days make you appear like someone suffering with poor mental health.
Leon's in a very bad way then.
I've been like this since I was about 5, so I must have learned some coping mechanisms
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
c.f. Trump
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
There does need to be a reckoning for the GOP. If not, the enduring lesson will be you get rewarded in American political life for unconscionably bad behaviour.
Ah the pirate king arrives
Btw your neighbour isn't happy with you
He is. We've just had a pleasant chat over the garden fence. He's offered to lend me his power drill.
That sounds more like Bartholomew Roberts. He's the "pirate" on here.
Don't forget Lennon - his picture next to his name is, I am pretty sure, the emblem of the Pirate Party (various Scandiwegians exercised about IT Copyright and intellectual property).
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
You know best I suppose. But going from telling everyone you’ve been going through mental health problems that you need to fix to calling people morons and twats whilst generally sounding angry in three days make you appear like someone suffering with poor mental health.
Leon's in a very bad way then.
I've been like this since I was about 5, so I must have learned some coping mechanisms
I had a psychiatrist once and after one session of talking to me she said "One of us is sane and I am no longer sure its me" and discharged me
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
You know best I suppose. But going from telling everyone you’ve been going through mental health problems that you need to fix to calling people morons and twats whilst generally sounding angry in three days make you appear like someone suffering with poor mental health.
I'm not calling anyone a twat. I posted "Simon Cowell Twat TV". A throw-away descriptor for not just all of the Cowell-led talent shows but all of the dating love island naked type shows - the whole industry, not a person.
And I am calling Tories - collectively - morons when they forget all about the basics of capitalism and reduce everything to "who will pay for that".
There are people on here calling a certain poster names. I am not. Yet you're focused on me because...? I have a different political perspective and can list issues and ideas?
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Farage, as far as I know, has never once in his long career engaged with reality to propose a practical solution to a real problem. It is not his way of doing things. This doesn't seem to be doing him any harm regrettably
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
Practical solutions to real problems inevitably annoy some (potentially large) subset of the population. It’s much easier to claim that there is some imaginary solution that will please everyone and comes without the pesky downsides that real solutions inevitably suffer from.
With vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
Sarah Pochin (winner of Runcorn) was just on Woman's Hour. She was excellent - really worth a listen. She gave a simple (simplistic?) practical policy - send 10,000 foreign prisoners home instead of letting wife beaters out early. It was one of the most accessible performances of a politician I can remember, hitting numerous hot spots and not coming across as either a nutter or a racist. I still hope she loses the next general election horribly though.
That's the sort of thing that should worry Labour. Could Farage go from being Reform's biggest asset to their biggest liability?
If you have a nice home in a nice green area altruism hits the buffers.
The privileged need to realise that things must change, if they want them to stay the same.
What needs to change is for immigration to become either negative, nil, or less than 10K a year, as the majority of people want according to the latest polling.
That's impossible without economic depressiom, which is why first Johnson, and then Farage won't be able to deliver it.
What that would really need is for a rightwing politician to.really commit to something very out of character - cast-iron commitments to lift the education and training budget over a number of years, such that the above can be attempted again after a clearly defined number of years.
The only way out: 1. Migration is unsustainably and absurdly high. Smash the gangs. Rejoin the international accords. Rapidly process and return. Find an off-shore way to process the questionable cases. 2. Migration is needed because we don't have enough doctors care staff factory workers brickies plumbers sparkies etc. If you want to set the level to zero then here's the cost to you tomorrow 3. We're going to invest heavily now to train up the next generation of Brits to fill these critical jobs. This will take 5 years and we're going to need migrants until then. To help fix the crisis in our universities and remove a large flow of migrants we're going to fund universities to refocus on academic and vocational courses we need
Knuckleheads will complain but with an actual plan to move things forward they will be an ever-shrinking minority.
If Farage was shrewder than I've so far given him credit for, this would actually be a realistic sort of plan for him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
Our politics has been reduced to absurdist black-and-white binary absolutism. Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
Friendly advice; I think your mental health would be better if you didn’t throw so many insults around
Disagree - it helps. And its a genuine question - when did the Tories abandon capitalism?
You know best I suppose. But going from telling everyone you’ve been going through mental health problems that you need to fix to calling people morons and twats whilst generally sounding angry in three days make you appear like someone suffering with poor mental health.
I'm not calling anyone a twat. I posted "Simon Cowell Twat TV". A throw-away descriptor for not just all of the Cowell-led talent shows but all of the dating love island naked type shows - the whole industry, not a person.
And I am calling Tories - collectively - morons when they forget all about the basics of capitalism and reduce everything to "who will pay for that".
There are people on here calling a certain poster names. I am not. Yet you're focused on me because...? I have a different political perspective and can list issues and ideas?
You sound quite.... manic. Intense highs and lows. I wouldn't normally mention this - it's too personal - but you have told us you've been having issues
It's not the insults it's the intensity and the moodswings. And this is just an observation - you are a well-liked member of the PB Regulars!
Just a briefing message, if they need to make preparations for get-togethers or holidays, that World Sex Day will be coming on June 9th this year.
Thank you.
I'm getting my new Tesla on 7th June - that's Better Than Sex* so is in the diary.
An awful lot planned with this new car - starting with the mea culpa reversion of the YouTube channel back to Just Get a Tesla on Friday. For all of the talk of inflation and thus the cost of money its great to be able to exploit the company by taking its 0% finance deal. Must be costing them a bomb.
Comments
Borrow £bns "for investment (LOL)" on the back of the revenue stream (water bills), take the £bns as dividends. Same robbing model as BHS, Man U, etc etc
If the water company was still nationalised either the borrowing wouldn't have occurred or it would have been spent on the infrastructure, there's no 3m diameter mains supply to Private Equity.
Looking at my bill
Per day the standing charge is £0.4244 (10.166p Water, 7.277p waste, 4.666p highways, 20.333p band 3 house or £154.92 annualised
Water is then charged at £1.8195 per ton and 95% * £1.3008 for waste = £3.055 per m^3.
That was before Severn Trent's increases as I requested a bill to April, so I assume they'll be 22% higher or whatnot now.
How does everyone else's compare ?
I ran across a video about the sinking of the MC Estonia Ro-Ro ferry in 1994, that I had more or less forgotten about. 852 deaths.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH70vM3wp0Y
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/may/21/brexit-food-control-post-at-portsmouth-may-have-to-be-demolished-says-port-director
..The British Ports Association (BPA) has welcomed the new deal between the UK and the EU, but is reiterating its call for compensation for ports that were forced to build now-redundant border infrastructure...
In a few years' time, Leon will be looking forward to building them all over again.
But, yes, so much in Africa gets relatively ignored. Rwanda invaded DRC and it barely got any attention.
Also while they publish inflation figures monthly that figure is I believe calculated as compared to this month last year not since last month. If we have an inflation figure of 3.5% a month we are in shit upto our chins
Oh and takeaway and eating out costs rose by 13%
Manchester United and Tottenham fans clash before Europa League showdown
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2025/05/21/man-utd-tottenham-fans-clash-europa-league-final/
We annually negotiate fishing access into EEA waters and vice versa. We catch their fish because that's we like to eat. They catch our fish because thats what they like to eat. And the fish we catch in our own waters we largely sell to them because we don't want to eat it.
That is the reality when you wipe the froth from your mouth. The existing Boris deal made it difficult and expensive for us to sell our fish. Read the articles from fish industry people. Seriously big operators have folded in the last few years because the Boris deal made it financially non-viable. The new deal removes those barriers.
I suspect your problem isn't fish - which be honest you don't actually understand - and is more "paying money and taking EU law again".
I have no doubt that we will be paying money. But again, in the real world we are already paying money into a bonfire racking up huge costs trying to make the BTOM actually function. Paying the EU money to save more money may be an ideological objection in principle, but it certainly isn't "no money now" vs "money then"
None of this lame worrying about vets in Portsmouth
A more reasonable conclusion would be that, given the constraints of his red lines, Sir Keir has got about as good a deal with the EU as he could have done. It may not have a large economic impact, but it should bring some financial benefits to hard-pressed Britons. It will remove some of the irritations created by Brexit.
How did he do ?
First, as pointed out in the Kellner and Coates links, a move to the right risks shedding votes on the left.
But more important is that even without moving right, attacking Reform aids the Conservative Party more than it helps Labour.
I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
They took money every which way, while the regulator did nothing.
But you could cut through 95% of the complexity simply by having it publicly owned.
This might be a pretty good one.
Trying China's robotaxi in Wuhan
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/business/companies/20250521/trying-chinas-robotaxi-in-wuhan
..On May 13, at the Wuhan headquarters of Huawei-backed startup Huarizixing, vice president Ren Xuefeng demonstrated the company’s smart road technology — a key pillar of China’s autonomous strategy. Their system connects vehicles, infrastructure and cloud services, enabling real-time sharing of road conditions. At 125 kilometers of roads in Wuhan, Huarizixing’s systems can now calculate traffic signal changes, helping vehicles decide whether to proceed through intersections without stopping.
Ren explained, “With our in-vehicle terminals and city traffic data, we can not only support navigation but even control the timing of traffic lights. It’s all made possible through public-private cooperation and government funding.”
Nearby, software engineer Dong Yong of Guangting Information Technology Company described an office complex housing six or seven firms specializing in autonomous driving. He called it “the world’s first industrial ecosystem for smart connected vehicles,” where companies openly collaborate and share resources. “About 80 percent of technical issues can be solved internally here,” he said.
This collaborative environment is backed by a deep talent pool. Wuhan is home to 42 universities, including Wuhan University and Huazhong University of Science and Technology, as well as 56 major research institutes. With over 300,000 technical experts and more than 800,000 university students, the region offers one of China’s strongest concentrations of automotive and engineering talent.
“Beijing and Shanghai may have more general talent, but when it comes to automotive engineering, Wuhan is unmatched," Ren noted...
Mr Starmer's Communications Programme, when it appears, needs to keep reminding those persuadable voters of what it was like before.
him to adopt.
So far I've only seen him look for short-term gains, though.
https://youtu.be/kSn82mQlC_s?si=TNFdaoUZOtgSVbye
Amusingly I do have one friend who is very vocal about how his right to work in the eu has been stripped from him and its a total calumny but as I said to him "mate you are 62 you never expressed any desire to work in the eu before brexit, hell of the 40 odd years I have known you judging by the 15 years you have spent during that time claiming benefits you have shown little desire to work in the uk either"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MygcnsWo9A
To save you listening to an interview with last year's winner, Tristan Kirk of the London Evening Standard (or whatever it is called now) for his work on the Single Justice Procedure, and Ian Hislop's jokes, the winners are the Guardian's Butler and Halliday for their reporting on the carer's allowance scandal.
The shortlist was:-
Charlie Brinkhurst-Cuff
The Guardian/Reuters Institute
Out of Sight: Missing People campaign
Brinkhurst-Cuff movingly told the story of Fiona Holm’s disappearance, asking why it was so overlooked. She supplemented her reporting with a wider investigation into how the media covers missing people.
Patrick Butler & Josh Halliday
The Guardian
The carer’s allowance scandal
Vulnerable carers were taken to court for accidentally claiming carer’s allowance while working part-time – even when some of them had reported their earnings to the DWP. Labour has now set up an independent review.
Laura Hughes
Financial Times
Lead poisoning
In this deeply reported investigation into the effects of lead in paint and in the soil, Hughes asked a provocative question: will lead exposure one day be seen as a scandal on the level of asbestos?
Aaron Walawalkar & Harriet Clugston
Liberty Investigates in partnership with Sky News, Metro and The Guardian
Inside UK universities’ Gaza protest “crackdown”
The investigation unit at the human rights charity looked at British universities’ harsh measures against pro-Palestinian protests and activism on campus, and the institutions’ close cooperation with police.
Jim Waterson
LondonCentric
Lime bikes and broken legs
Waterson’s Substack newsletter uncovered a spate of broken legs caused by the heavy frames of Lime electronic bikes falling on their riders. Who was regulating this Californian company?
Abi Whistance
The Liverpool Post
Investigation into the Big Help Project
Whistance’s four-part investigation for the Liverpool Post newsletter exposed a housing charity that left residents of its homes living in dire conditions.
https://www.private-eye.co.uk/paul-foot-award
Interviews with each of the candidates can be found on the Private Eye YouTube channel (and other podcast platforms are available).
I'm joking, I think they're just reacting in panic.
Even Johnson engaged with reality when he had to, eg Get Brexit Done, resulting in a deal so bad he later disowned it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zniiOQIMA0 , 20 mins
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anduril_YFQ-44
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_YFQ-42
For example, where do you draw red lines around groups such as Britain First, Patriotic Alternative etc - there now being Reform Councillors who are in relationship with them?
That I think is one of the matters the party will have to deal with. They have a number of factions in their Councillors and activist-base, and are being publicly targeted by such groups for infiltration.
Here's a piece in the Telegraph from this week, with some questions - Tommy Robinson support, "demolish Mosques", and so on.
https://archive.ph/EyWe4
(FWIW I think the Telegraph have a few dilemmas now offering blind support for Reform; they will need to nuance it. I expect them to reject particular 'crass' proposals, whilst supporting a nativist position.)
For one comparison, a few years ago I would vote for Ashfield Independents, but their Deputy Leader has committed fairly serious criminal offences involving endangering the public and perjury (driving down the traffic calmed High Street at 60mph+, trying to persuade the police on 999 that his innocent neighbour was attacking him with a knife) and he is still in post and standing for Election, so they have completely lost me.
Core CPIH (CPIH excluding energy, food, alcohol and tobacco) rose by 4.5% in the 12 months to April 2025, up from 4.2% in the 12 months to March; the CPIH goods annual rate rose from 0.6% to 1.7%, while the CPIH services annual rate rose from 5.4% to 5.8%.
As I said in the previous thread the internals of the 3.5% are about as ugly as you can get if you're Rachel Reeves. Whilst the post covid inflation fundamentals were very much out of the government's control (We don't control international container and oil prices) this particular number very much is of the government's own making so Bailey will be listening to the Huw Pills and Catherine Manns rather than Swati Dinghra and keeping rates higher than they otherwise might have been.
- Boeing MQ28 Ghostbat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_MQ-28_Ghost_Bat
- Kratos's XQ58 Valkyrie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratos_XQ-58_Valkyrie
- Northrup Grumman's model 437 Vanguard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaled_Composites_437
- at least one still undisclosed effort out of Lockheed Martin
We (the British) are seriously behind in this respectWith vim, vigour & an engaging personality you can use this approach to enter the very highest positions of power, so long as you can convince enough of the population that you have the solutions to their problems. That reality will eventually assert itself is not your problem - it’s theirs.
Rent+ council tax + water + power +internet+ phone + food = 2156
Currently
Rent + council tax + water + power + internet + phone+ food = 2472
An inflation rate for me of 14%
splitting it down to food/ bills
Last year food was about 20.8%
This year its 20.22% as I have economised somewhat to make the money last till the end of the month
So most of that inflation is unavoidable for me. My essentials if you exclude food the inflation rate is 14.12%.
My food inflation rate is 16.66% despite substituting some stuff for own brand etc
(Yes I know my food is excessive compared to most, but hey got to have some luxuries in life)
Note no transport in their as I mostly walk and don't need to commute to work which also relieves the pressure to buy new clothes a lot of the time
So given the unavoidable stuff is at 14% and accounts for about 80% of what I spend how is the inflation rate 3.5%?
It was interesting yesterday, multiple cabinet members 'testified' before congress, and each and every one of them lied their ass off in service of the Mad King
The unanswered question is what these people think will happen in the long run.
Lying to congress is supposed to be a felony. I know the DOJ in its current form will never prosecute them, but they seem to be operating under the assumption that there will never be any blowback, ever.
I am not as confident as they appear to be
Either you want to close the border NOW and sink the boats, or you want 704m illegals to arrive tomorrow.
Basic maths tells us that the post Boris numbers are absurdly unsustainable. So it has to come down and do so significantly which means a *practical and workable* plan to actually reduce it.
But at the same time we're reliant on migrants because we have a whole stack of jobs we can't fill. Professions we don't train enough people in, geographies where people either don't want to live or can't afford to live, skills we have let go.
Morons equate a lack of people to do job x in place y with unemployed z and say "make them work for benefits". Again, we need a *practical and workable plan*.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the NHS? Because we've made training expensive and difficult, and have an NHS where working conditions are terrible due to the lack of cash. So we need to invest to train people up and then retain that talent. Invest money now to save money later.
Why are we reliant on migrants in the care sector or factories or an endless list of jobs? Because pay and conditions are poor and housing costs are high - Brits can't afford the work and even if they wanted to we've trained a generation that work is crap because you should be a star on Simon Cowell twat tv. Slash housing costs over a period by building a shitton of new houses for rental at set rents not BTL rents
And how do we build? Fund a mass apprenticeship scheme in partnership with industry and universities. With a marketing campaign to make construction cool - "Build our Nation's Future" or something.
It will mean borrowing to invest now. And getting a return on that investment. Delivering long-term savings. Its called CAPITALISM to all the moron Tories who screech on about "who will pay for that" by reflex. You used to be capitalists, what the fuck happened to you?
It would be hilarious if it happened
Just goes to show how frenetic British politics has become since 2010.
Kendal Town Council, Highgate Ward
Lib Dem 411 (73%)
Green 76 (13.5%)
Ind 48 (8.5%)
Lab 28 (5%)
Lib Dem hold
“Moderates can never suppress the far-right by adopting their policies because the far-right will forever shift their policies to whatever outflanks moderates.
All it achieves is legitimising far-right narratives, artificially shifting policy rightwards & facilitating radicalisation towards fascism.”
🆕Latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention. Reform hit 30% for first time in our polling, opening up an 8pt lead also their highest
➡️ REF UK 30% (+2)
🌹 LAB 22% (-3)
🌳 CON 21% (+1)
🔶 LIB DEM 14% (nc)
🌍 GREEN 8% (nc)
🟡 SNP 2% (nc)
N = 2,090 | Dates: 16 - 19/5 |Change w12/5
https://x.com/luketryl/status/1925084392684192109?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Then again, some foreign countries may be seen as a softer touch. And back when we had prison capacity we used to get media panics about people "escaping justice" by not spending decades rotting in a cell here.
oh, wait...
none exist in their councils anyway
https://bsky.app/profile/stevepeers.bsky.social/post/3lpofereosk2c
https://www.reddit.com/r/CasualConversation/comments/d4kbgd/my_neighbour_is_flying_a_skull_and_crossbones/
3 days ago: "Reform UK launches war on LTNs: Nigel Farage's party will axe hated green roads schemes in all 10 of its newly-won council authorities" *
2 hours ago: "Reform UK fulfils pledge to scrap LTNs in its council areas as none exist." **
That's an artefact of engaging policy mouth without putting brain into gear, and indulging in superficial culture wars.
Control of through traffic by estate layout, including the definitive "modal filters" such as cul-de-sacs, has been a fixed feature of UK estate planning since at least the 1930s. My dad laid out areas of them across my town in the 1960s when he was with the Council.
Reform won't be opening these up, because that is where their voters live, and even people who demand the right to drive down other people's streets always want the benefits for themselves.
They now need something else to add to the shouting campaign, or risk wrecking their own support base. A political opportunity for opponents to write to local papers asking "will Reform be opening up all the cul-de-sacs as through roads in X area?"
* https://archive.is/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14723565/Reform-UK-LTNs-Nigel-Farage-axe-green-roads-scheme.html
** https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/may/21/reform-uk-ltn-council-areas-none-exist
Thank you.
Can they both fall further?
Ah, my coat
https://www.nationaldaycalendar.com/national-day/national-donald-duck-day-june-9
😬
Labour's brilliant No E Gates deal really making a dent in Reform, there
Yes I know the polling date blah blah
And I am calling Tories - collectively - morons when they forget all about the basics of capitalism and reduce everything to "who will pay for that".
There are people on here calling a certain poster names. I am not. Yet you're focused on me because...? I have a different political perspective and can list issues and ideas?
You sound quite.... manic. Intense highs and lows. I wouldn't normally mention this - it's too personal - but you have told us you've been having issues
It's not the insults it's the intensity and the moodswings. And this is just an observation - you are a well-liked member of the PB Regulars!
An awful lot planned with this new car - starting with the mea culpa reversion of the YouTube channel back to Just Get a Tesla on Friday. For all of the talk of inflation and thus the cost of money its great to be able to exploit the company by taking its 0% finance deal. Must be costing them a bomb.
*not