So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
Last week, my organisation Fairer Finance published a report showing that by 2040, more than half of retirees will need to use their property to maintain their standard of living in later life.
I’d like to see public information campaigns that start to talk about housing as a key store of wealth that we should be using to help fund retirement. The Government should also look for other ways to incentivise downsizing, such as reducing or even scrapping stamp duty for “last-time” buyers.
Problem is that they don't want to downsize as "they will have nothing left to pass on to next generation". The only time a house is used for retirement is when Care home fees have to be paid. Care homes will force a sale if the debt gets too large. And Dilnot was suggesting the government (ie OPM) is used for anything over £86K.
There really does need to be a hard-nosed look at all those people who wish to pass on current cost/spending to future generations. The young can only pay (or suffer) so much.
I believe quite a few retired people use equity withdrawal to fund their expenses.
I did that 20 years ago. It's frightening at the interest you pay but I have no dependents to inherit my property.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
Given per the article the only flag taken down so far has been the Ukrainian one, possibly you are misrepresenting them.
Evidence? You have one quote from Kent.
Moreover there have been complaints year in and year out about pride flags etc. so it may not have been seen in the last 3 weeks but that doesn’t mean it was the motivating factor
Evidence was the article you are complaining about.
Actually the story is a party that happily decries gesture politics in others trips up when indulging in performative flag banning themselves and they don't like it being pointed out.
The quote fron the article is:
one of Reform’s first acts was to take down the Ukrainian flag – hoisted to show solidarity with the war-besieged nation – and vowed not to fly rainbow-coloured flags in support of LGBTQ+ residents
Which demonstrates that it is not just about Ukraine but a broader campaign of nastiness. Which is exactly my point.
We're beating this to death but you claimed a factual statement was misrepresentation.
I’m even boring myself!
But the statement was So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag
That’s simply not true. At the very minimum Reform’s agenda included banning Palestinian and Pride flags.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
I fly no flag for Reform but your statement is misleading as it implies they were explicitly banning the flying of the Ukrainian flag. In fact they were banning the flying of all flags except those of England and the UK. Petty and pointless but not specifically targetted against Ukraine.
What is the main other national flag that is currently being flown? It’s Ukraine’s.
All flags. Not national flags. Its clearly aimed at the various pride flags.
The Kent council leader was explicit about this being the Ukraine flag
The new leader of Kent County Council (KCC) has sparked a backlash over plans to remove the Ukraine flag from the chamber.
Linden Kemkaran made the pledge after she was voted into her new post last Thursday evening, saying the gesture is a “distraction”.
I have no doubt that Reform is both hostile to Ukraine and sympathetic to Putin. They take their lead from Trump.
Polls found most Reform voters would have voted for Trump last year of course. Most Labour, LD, Green and even most Conservative voters would have voted for Harris
Pretty solid reason not to vote for Reform.
Trump. Putin. By their friends shall you know them
If Trump takes the US out of NATO, it's pretty much certain Farage will advocate the UK withdraws too. He'll say minus the US is basically the dreaded 'European Army'.
If anyone wants out of NATO, Zack Polanski, who is standing for the Green leadership, is advocating withdrawing from NATO.
And that will benefit the environment how exactly?
Thinking on Reform and their new councils and the explosion of support/members(subscribers) People join parties and become active with at least a vague idea of what they are (meant to be) standing up for Low taxes, small state, social conservatism, free market Unions, the working class, redistribution, welfare state, social democracy Liberalism, orange bookery, the care services, PR Save the planet, eco activism Independence for Scotland, Wales
Then we have Britain needs Reform but it has no ideas and no principles and no road map, it's just a dumping ground for the thoroughly pissed off. Just getting jnto politics because you're pissed off with it all is a dangerous road. When we are chanting 'you don't know what you're doing!' At them it will be because they don't, it's just angry people being angry and wanting to amorphously 'change stuff'
What Reform do we need? Everyone on minimum wage in assigned jobs? Mandatory life sentences for crime? UBI? Luddite attacks on solar infrastructure? Vigilante policing? Privatised health? A bigger army? Navy? Space force?
Unless there is some definition, soon, we end up with this behemoth running everything but having zero idea what to do and it will all unravel very very fast.
They strike me as Syriza types - a knee jerk reaction that might implode.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
As a Brit, the rise of Farage and the Trumpification of British politics is the worst political development of my lifetime.
All those years worrying about the extreme Left...and the incoming disaster is coming from the Right.
The Conservative Party really does have to get its act together - something which is as much in the interest of the Centre Left as it is of the moderate right.
Rob Ford @robfordmancs.bsky.social · 1h Just pondering next year's locals - suspect they are going to be even more turbulent, and even more painful for both traditional governing parties, than this month's were. Last up in 2022 - before Truss, before Gaza, before Reform, before Labour's poll collapse in govt...
Follow All of London up, all of Birmingham up, seats up in most of the big metro boroughs where Labour start strong, and in lots of the Southern districts where Tories held up in 2022 (but where Reform surged in the equivalent counties this month). Its all going to get very, very messy.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
Quite. The USA could successfully blast anyone's country back to the stone age (or drone their entire Government), but they don't, and not every country assumes the position pre-emptively like we do.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
As a Brit, the rise of Farage and the Trumpification of British politics is the worst political development of my lifetime.
All those years worrying about the extreme Left...and the incoming disaster is coming from the Right.
The Conservative Party really does have to get its act together - something which is as much in the interest of the Centre Left as it is of the moderate right.
LOL youve spent your life wishing the Conservatives would die and now youve got your wish
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
As a Brit, the rise of Farage and the Trumpification of British politics is the worst political development of my lifetime.
All those years worrying about the extreme Left...and the incoming disaster is coming from the Right.
The Conservative Party really does have to get its act together - something which is as much in the interest of the Centre Left as it is of the moderate right.
LOL youve spent your life wishing the Conservatives would die and now youve got your wish
Not me, mate. I've always seen the Conservatives and Labour - as broad-based, mainstream parties - as affording protection from the extremists, populists, and nutters. Their breakdown is ominous.
I would appreciate if Moonrabbit would answer my question as to whether the Chagos Deal makes the Falklands more or less secure.
Regarding the header, this is simply a measure of awareness. There is no such thing as being aware of this deal and liking it. It's not like welfare where some are in receipt and some are paying, or a tax increase, assisted dying, or the NHS - there are no winners and losers or ideological fault lines. There are just losers.
Those who are in favour are just being reflexively pro-Labour (it's about equal with their poll rating) and are either ignorant about the deal or are acting from partisan loyalty.
My mind is still open on your question. persuade me. 🙂
I would answer, argument it’s less secure is based on precedent has been set by this case. But has a precedent been set, if each situation is unique? Put more specifically, when inhabitants have chosen, have there been instances UN and courts ruled against the choice of inhabitants? That would set a precedent making UK sovereignty of Falklands more insecure, our enemies like Moscow, would line up to game the UN workings, throwing their weight behind a claimant.
I’m not in favour of this Governments Chagos deal. My header was sharing my understanding they chose this option wanting to be seen as a fair and responsible power, rather than simply claiming land outright without international support, on basis this approach brings more leverage to our diplomacy, more influence, friends, more security deals and trade. Which actually is not new - it’s identical reasoning in 1898 British Empire chose to sign a lease on something else. They thought they would get more of the good stuff doing it that way.
I know you disagree. the other day you fully signed up to 1 million years BC diplomacy, Raquel Welch in Faun skins and a club in her hand. Perhaps one day we should have a simple header IS IT BETTER TO BE FEARED OR LOVED? and debate it out underneath. I’m certain it’s not as open and shut as you sure it is.
My personal preference is neither sovereignty or the deal. With either sovereignty or lease, UK gets absolutely nothing in defence and security that isn’t also pooled with others. Let US and India deal and pay this time.. But is that realistic? Was it ever an option?
Two things you unrealistically dismiss Lucky. Keeping sovereignty WILL come with brickbats and loss of influence. When it went into court, no one in the world turned up for us, apart from USA and some little places slipped a backhander to vote with us. No NATO allies, no Canada, no Australia. No one in the Indian Ocean or South China Sea, as India had used our Imperial Squat to whip them all up against doing any business with us.
Secondly, when UK got into base talks back in 1960s, it came hand in hand with interlocking UK defence and security with the US catalogue of expensive kit. Are we in any position to decouple? Seriously?
I don’t mind Reform making same glib mistakes as you, but fear Conservative front bench making the same and being unrealistic about what options actually were. in government or opposition, Lab & Con have been as one in agreement being interlocked with US equipment and security since 1960s. Today in opposition Tories attacking the deal as far too favourable to the US. What exactly is Kemi saying, what exactly is her policy, on interlocked with US on security and key bits of equipment?
One of your better streams of consciousness. The idea that anyone in the region might ever again have cause to fear us is amusing.
Rob Ford @robfordmancs.bsky.social · 1h Just pondering next year's locals - suspect they are going to be even more turbulent, and even more painful for both traditional governing parties, than this month's were. Last up in 2022 - before Truss, before Gaza, before Reform, before Labour's poll collapse in govt...
Follow All of London up, all of Birmingham up, seats up in most of the big metro boroughs where Labour start strong, and in lots of the Southern districts where Tories held up in 2022 (but where Reform surged in the equivalent counties this month). Its all going to get very, very messy.
All-out elections in Bradford next year due to boundary changes. Labour is going to get shafted from both ends. I expect NOC.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
Even if your loony conspiracy theory held water, this would still be a sensible and patriotic policy, so my comment would still stand.
The UK flag represents us all. I am glad that it is being flown in favour of sectional and cause célèbre flags. I hope the message is internalised and that all employees and elected officials come to realise that they are there to serve the country, not jump on the latest sectional bandwagon.
Rob Ford @robfordmancs.bsky.social · 1h Just pondering next year's locals - suspect they are going to be even more turbulent, and even more painful for both traditional governing parties, than this month's were. Last up in 2022 - before Truss, before Gaza, before Reform, before Labour's poll collapse in govt...
Follow All of London up, all of Birmingham up, seats up in most of the big metro boroughs where Labour start strong, and in lots of the Southern districts where Tories held up in 2022 (but where Reform surged in the equivalent counties this month). Its all going to get very, very messy.
2021 Con 45 Lab 34 ish in the polling start of May 2022 Con 34 Lab 40 ish start of May
Tories defending far less in 2026 and will have London where they are already much more hollowed out to ameliorate losses. There's no way (unless they have totally imploded by then) that will be worse for them - they are unlikely to lose all their councils this time (Harrow etc likely stay blue imo) and they were nationally 10 points worse off in 2022 so not defending from such a perch. That said it will be a further retreat for them.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
Thinking on Reform and their new councils and the explosion of support/members(subscribers) People join parties and become active with at least a vague idea of what they are (meant to be) standing up for Low taxes, small state, social conservatism, free market Unions, the working class, redistribution, welfare state, social democracy Liberalism, orange bookery, the care services, PR Save the planet, eco activism Independence for Scotland, Wales
Then we have Britain needs Reform but it has no ideas and no principles and no road map, it's just a dumping ground for the thoroughly pissed off. Just getting jnto politics because you're pissed off with it all is a dangerous road. When we are chanting 'you don't know what you're doing!' At them it will be because they don't, it's just angry people being angry and wanting to amorphously 'change stuff'
What Reform do we need? Everyone on minimum wage in assigned jobs? Mandatory life sentences for crime? UBI? Luddite attacks on solar infrastructure? Vigilante policing? Privatised health? A bigger army? Navy? Space force?
Unless there is some definition, soon, we end up with this behemoth running everything but having zero idea what to do and it will all unravel very very fast.
They strike me as Syriza types - a knee jerk reaction that might implode.
Sorry, just fancied a ranty musing
The country needs significant (small R) reform, the problem is that none of us can probably agree on what that looks like.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
Thinking on Reform and their new councils and the explosion of support/members(subscribers) People join parties and become active with at least a vague idea of what they are (meant to be) standing up for Low taxes, small state, social conservatism, free market Unions, the working class, redistribution, welfare state, social democracy Liberalism, orange bookery, the care services, PR Save the planet, eco activism Independence for Scotland, Wales
Then we have Britain needs Reform but it has no ideas and no principles and no road map, it's just a dumping ground for the thoroughly pissed off. Just getting jnto politics because you're pissed off with it all is a dangerous road. When we are chanting 'you don't know what you're doing!' At them it will be because they don't, it's just angry people being angry and wanting to amorphously 'change stuff'
What Reform do we need? Everyone on minimum wage in assigned jobs? Mandatory life sentences for crime? UBI? Luddite attacks on solar infrastructure? Vigilante policing? Privatised health? A bigger army? Navy? Space force?
Unless there is some definition, soon, we end up with this behemoth running everything but having zero idea what to do and it will all unravel very very fast.
They strike me as Syriza types - a knee jerk reaction that might implode.
Sorry, just fancied a ranty musing
The country needs significant (small R) reform, the problem is that none of us can probably agree on what that looks like.
That's the danger. Flocking to a banner with very different ideas of its meaning. French Revolution stuff
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
Thinking on Reform and their new councils and the explosion of support/members(subscribers) People join parties and become active with at least a vague idea of what they are (meant to be) standing up for Low taxes, small state, social conservatism, free market Unions, the working class, redistribution, welfare state, social democracy Liberalism, orange bookery, the care services, PR Save the planet, eco activism Independence for Scotland, Wales
Then we have Britain needs Reform but it has no ideas and no principles and no road map, it's just a dumping ground for the thoroughly pissed off. Just getting jnto politics because you're pissed off with it all is a dangerous road. When we are chanting 'you don't know what you're doing!' At them it will be because they don't, it's just angry people being angry and wanting to amorphously 'change stuff'
What Reform do we need? Everyone on minimum wage in assigned jobs? Mandatory life sentences for crime? UBI? Luddite attacks on solar infrastructure? Vigilante policing? Privatised health? A bigger army? Navy? Space force?
Unless there is some definition, soon, we end up with this behemoth running everything but having zero idea what to do and it will all unravel very very fast.
They strike me as Syriza types - a knee jerk reaction that might implode.
Sorry, just fancied a ranty musing
I think you should watch this - very interesting and (to me) encouraging.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
Farage isn't the problem, he's just a wide boy, it's what comes after him once he gets bored that's the potential problem
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
Farage isn't Trump. But Cameron wasn't far wrong with his fruitcakes and loonies quote.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
It goes far deeper than that. We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
What should really worry you is that they won't do that. See the complaints from the Guardian about how little they have 'achieved' having had control of some councils for 3 weeks. I think they're cautions, serious and in it for the long haul. All whilst Starmer is shitting the Labour bed so badly you'll be lucky to be polling in the high teens come the next election.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
We've actually closed the gap with Germany. So little to do with those gentlemen. It's all to do with how the Americans have turbo-charged their economy. No doubt natural resources have played a part, but why in the last 30 years, and not before?
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
Even if your loony conspiracy theory held water, this would still be a sensible and patriotic policy, so my comment would still stand.
The UK flag represents us all. I am glad that it is being flown in favour of sectional and cause célèbre flags. I hope the message is internalised and that all employees and elected officials come to realise that they are there to serve the country, not jump on the latest sectional bandwagon.
Flying a Ukrainian flag is "sectional"?
Well, we wouldn't wish to upset the Putinists would we?
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
We've actually closed the gap with Germany. So little to do with those gentlemen. It's all to do with how the Americans have turbo-charged their economy. No doubt natural resources have played a part, but why in the last 30 years, and not before?
If Trump carries on in the same vein, their long economic boom will hit the wall.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
Other way round imo. Trump might be wrong about tariffs and trade but he does have a vision, however divorced from reality. I'm not sure that Nigel Farage has. Even on Europe, has he said anything about our post-Brexit role other than that the Conservatives ballsed it up in some unspecified way? He knows what he is against but what is he for?
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
It’s actually been a driver of bampottery. The gains have been very concentrated in tech and even within tech have been concentrated among the top 10%
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
Even if your loony conspiracy theory held water, this would still be a sensible and patriotic policy, so my comment would still stand.
The UK flag represents us all. I am glad that it is being flown in favour of sectional and cause célèbre flags. I hope the message is internalised and that all employees and elected officials come to realise that they are there to serve the country, not jump on the latest sectional bandwagon.
Flying a Ukrainian flag is "sectional"?
Well, we wouldn't wish to upset the Putinists would we?
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
We've actually closed the gap with Germany. So little to do with those gentlemen. It's all to do with how the Americans have turbo-charged their economy. No doubt natural resources have played a part, but why in the last 30 years, and not before?
Britain's economy was always more aligned with America than Europe. That was one of the arguments against joining the ERM, let alone the Euro. If we are to take Germany as our comparator then perhaps it is Osborne to blame because Merkel was a big austerity fan too.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
Thatcher gets blamed for de-industrialisation, but the inflection point in our industrial output was actually under Blair.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
He is the tall one (my favourite quote from 'Allo 'Allo).
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Which is kinda the message of the poll in the header. Reform and Green backers can believe that, if only their party were in government, everything would be brilliant. Their ideas haven't been tried, so can't be said to have failed.
By the way, IF the 50% US tariff on EU imports sticks around for a while, and especially if the bloc retaliates, we are probably looking at our first actual material Brexit benefit.
One of the arguments for Brexit was the Singapore on Thames idea - poorly understood or articulated, but at its heart the vision of the UK as an entrepôt with low or zero barriers to trade, independence from the big trading blocs, openness to the US, China and EU but geo-economic neutrality.
It was one of the few potentially interesting benefits of leaving the EU but I always felt it at odds with the other arguments - closed borders, protectionism and autarky. It would also have required us to diverge much further and the economic hit from decoupling from the EU would be much greater than the upside. But Trump’s capricious tariff policies are accidentally giving us a bit of the benefit by accident.
If we really wanted to piss off the EU, Japan and Canada and gain a few multinationals we could now unilaterally abandon pillar 2, but I doubt that’s on the table.
Isn't the key point your first sentence?
Every time that Trump has announced mega MAGA tariffs like this, he has gone on not to implement them.
If there is a free and fair Presidential election in 2028, I suspect the Democrats will win by a landslide if Trump carries on doing what he is doing. In which case, much of the tariffs will disappear anyway. If there aren't free and fair US elections in 26 and 28, then having an incredibly close relationship economically and politically with the EU might be a good idea.
This is a big unknown that plays into all sorts of decisions. Does America recover its marbles after Trump?
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
Given per the article the only flag taken down so far has been the Ukrainian one, possibly you are misrepresenting them.
Evidence? You have one quote from Kent.
Moreover there have been complaints year in and year out about pride flags etc. so it may not have been seen in the last 3 weeks but that doesn’t mean it was the motivating factor
Evidence was the article you are complaining about.
Actually the story is a party that happily decries gesture politics in others trips up when indulging in performative flag banning themselves and they don't like it being pointed out.
The quote fron the article is:
one of Reform’s first acts was to take down the Ukrainian flag – hoisted to show solidarity with the war-besieged nation – and vowed not to fly rainbow-coloured flags in support of LGBTQ+ residents
Which demonstrates that it is not just about Ukraine but a broader campaign of nastiness. Which is exactly my point.
We're beating this to death but you claimed a factual statement was misrepresentation.
I’m even boring myself!
But the statement was So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag
That’s simply not true. At the very minimum Reform’s agenda included banning Palestinian and Pride flags.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
It goes far deeper than that. We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
Were more than capable of surviving withput the US, our governments have just been inept in keeping our forces modern
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
It goes far deeper than that. We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
Given per the article the only flag taken down so far has been the Ukrainian one, possibly you are misrepresenting them.
Evidence? You have one quote from Kent.
Moreover there have been complaints year in and year out about pride flags etc. so it may not have been seen in the last 3 weeks but that doesn’t mean it was the motivating factor
Evidence was the article you are complaining about.
Actually the story is a party that happily decries gesture politics in others trips up when indulging in performative flag banning themselves and they don't like it being pointed out.
The quote fron the article is:
one of Reform’s first acts was to take down the Ukrainian flag – hoisted to show solidarity with the war-besieged nation – and vowed not to fly rainbow-coloured flags in support of LGBTQ+ residents
Which demonstrates that it is not just about Ukraine but a broader campaign of nastiness. Which is exactly my point.
We're beating this to death but you claimed a factual statement was misrepresentation.
I’m even boring myself!
But the statement was So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag
That’s simply not true. At the very minimum Reform’s agenda included banning Palestinian and Pride flags.
That seems like a minor error compared to many repeated here often (e.g. exaggerated costs of the Chagos deal, asylum seekers supposedly staying in 4* hotels).
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
Thatcher gets blamed for de-industrialisation, but the inflection point in our industrial output was actually under Blair.
No, Thatcher was the inflection point, marking the end of decades of semi-consensus.
Blair largely carried on with her policies towards industry.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Net Zero is set the cost the British economy the same in today's money as World War II. And Starmer has just given away an island and arranged to hire it back for £30bn.
Good on you for having the balls to to talk about what the country can afford though - nice try.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
It goes far deeper than that. We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
Were more than capable of surviving withput the US, our governments have just been inept in keeping our forces modern
We are - but the effort to disentangle ourselves would be a major one, and would take many years. Pretending otherwise is just silly.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Yes, he’s a very successful businessman, but actually my assessment didn't include Lowe.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
It goes far deeper than that. We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
Were more than capable of surviving withput the US, our governments have just been inept in keeping our forces modern
We are - but the effort to disentangle ourselves would be a major one, and would take many years. Pretending otherwise is just silly.
IIm not pretending it would take time, it certainly will but I am saying it would be worthwhile putting the effort in.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
Thatcher gets blamed for de-industrialisation, but the inflection point in our industrial output was actually under Blair.
No, Thatcher was the inflection point, marking the end of decades of semi-consensus.
Blair largely carried on with her policies towards industry.
What was Blair’s equivalent of bringing Nissan to Sunderland?
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
Thatcher gets blamed for de-industrialisation, but the inflection point in our industrial output was actually under Blair.
No, Thatcher was the inflection point, marking the end of decades of semi-consensus.
Blair largely carried on with her policies towards industry.
What was Blair’s equivalent of bringing Nissan to Sunderland?
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
It goes far deeper than that. We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
Were more than capable of surviving withput the US, our governments have just been inept in keeping our forces modern
We are - but the effort to disentangle ourselves would be a major one, and would take many years. Pretending otherwise is just silly.
IIm not pretending it would take time, it certainly will but I am saying it would be worthwhile putting the effort in.
Sadly with the Chagos surrender deal, the PB commentariat's raging, implacable determination to decouple our defences from Uncle Sam has proven as fleeting as some predicted.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Yes, he’s a very successful businessman, but actually my assessment didn't include Lowe.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
The record of businessmen in government isn't great, though. To an extent, they're different things.
Businesses can, should and do just stop doing stuff that isn't profitable. Government doesn't have that leeway.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Yes, he’s a very successful businessman, but actually my assessment didn't include Lowe.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
Does the fetishization of 'business leaders' still have much to recommend it these days? Blair and Brown did it of course with 'the prawn-cocktail offensive', but I can't see what that led to other than some rather dodgy PPP schemes. And the British Right are always telling us how unproductive our businesses our, so that's not a ringing endorsement of their leaders either.
I would appreciate if Moonrabbit would answer my question as to whether the Chagos Deal makes the Falklands more or less secure.
Regarding the header, this is simply a measure of awareness. There is no such thing as being aware of this deal and liking it. It's not like welfare where some are in receipt and some are paying, or a tax increase, assisted dying, or the NHS - there are no winners and losers or ideological fault lines. There are just losers.
Those who are in favour are just being reflexively pro-Labour (it's about equal with their poll rating) and are either ignorant about the deal or are acting from partisan loyalty.
My mind is still open on your question. persuade me. 🙂
I would answer, argument it’s less secure is based on precedent has been set by this case. But has a precedent been set, if each situation is unique? Put more specifically, when inhabitants have chosen, have there been instances UN and courts ruled against the choice of inhabitants? That would set a precedent making UK sovereignty of Falklands more insecure, our enemies like Moscow, would line up to game the UN workings, throwing their weight behind a claimant.
I’m not in favour of this Governments Chagos deal. My header was sharing my understanding they chose this option wanting to be seen as a fair and responsible power, rather than simply claiming land outright without international support, on basis this approach brings more leverage to our diplomacy, more influence, friends, more security deals and trade. Which actually is not new - it’s identical reasoning in 1898 British Empire chose to sign a lease on something else. They thought they would get more of the good stuff doing it that way.
I know you disagree. the other day you fully signed up to 1 million years BC diplomacy, Raquel Welch in Faun skins and a club in her hand. Perhaps one day we should have a simple header IS IT BETTER TO BE FEARED OR LOVED? and debate it out underneath. I’m certain it’s not as open and shut as you sure it is.
My personal preference is neither sovereignty or the deal. With either sovereignty or lease, UK gets absolutely nothing in defence and security that isn’t also pooled with others. Let US and India deal and pay this time.. But is that realistic? Was it ever an option?
Two things you unrealistically dismiss Lucky. Keeping sovereignty WILL come with brickbats and loss of influence. When it went into court, no one in the world turned up for us, apart from USA and some little places slipped a backhander to vote with us. No NATO allies, no Canada, no Australia. No one in the Indian Ocean or South China Sea, as India had used our Imperial Squat to whip them all up against doing any business with us.
Secondly, when UK got into base talks back in 1960s, it came hand in hand with interlocking UK defence and security with the US catalogue of expensive kit. Are we in any position to decouple? Seriously?
I don’t mind Reform making same glib mistakes as you, but fear Conservative front bench making the same and being unrealistic about what options actually were. in government or opposition, Lab & Con have been as one in agreement being interlocked with US equipment and security since 1960s. Today in opposition Tories attacking the deal as far too favourable to the US. What exactly is Kemi saying, what exactly is her policy, on interlocked with US on security and key bits of equipment?
Thanks for the time taken to answer.
It is not about being feared or loved. It is a far simpler calculation of positive and negative consequences on the part of those whose interests clash with ours. We have sent a HUGE signal up not only that we are in giveaway mode even when there is no legal compulsion or military threat, but that we will even bankroll our own disgrace. AND that we don't give a flying fuck about the wishes of the peoples' of the islands and their democratic wishes. The positives of taking on the UK have just become massively more attractive than the perceived downsides, for anyone.
I am happy for the UK be loved - I am not in favour of flouncing around taking delight in upsetting foreign Governments. But we MUST be consistent in defence of our own legitimate interests. We are not being celebrated on the streets of Calcutta with this deal - we were already loathed for the Raj; we have simply added a layer of being despised for being weak and in terminal decline.
Time and again Labour have made the foolish error of thinking that British Governments (usually Tory ones) didn't get anywhere in negotiations with overseas powers because they weren’t being 'nice' enough. It led to Blair giving away much of our EU rebate for a non-existent reform of the CAP, it has led to Starmer giving away 12 years of fishing rights for fuck all, it now leads to this.
In the bigger picture - and if you don’t agree with this please correct me - for the last 100 years, the US has been on a relentless mission to expunge all influence UK has in the world. They usurped UK good and proper in Middle East, even drew up plans in the forties to kick us out of Hong Kong. India has joined in with glee. UK pressured into this deal by India, steering everyone in the region away from the old evil empire for not being fair to Mauritius. There’s the clearer story of being hauled into court on Chagos. Not China driving it, but India. (I put all this in the header btw)
And what’s UK been doing whilst “friends” have been burying the British Empire, expunging last traces of it, clipping away at our influence around the region like a back street vet neutering a dog? We’ve interlocked ourselves into the expensive catalogue of US weaponry. We’ve got the hit of ethnic cleansing the Chagos, and the ongoing mess from that we saw outside a court house last week. And we brought both India and US into the negotiating room to help write this lease agreement.
When PBers post “we should have kept sovereignty, simples” I put it to you - isn’t that the preferred option Washington wanted in the first place? their bitch to keep the sovereignty, carry on doing the dirty work, until India’s campaign against us made it all the more difficult?
When you look at this bigger picture, from sixties to now, what the word Chagos should mean in the English language is “the UK have been mugs” all these years doing the heavy lifting for others, and getting what back exactly? Keeping the sovereignty as you say, I say naively, thoughtlessly, glibly,, artlessly you keep insisting we should have kept the sovereignty, we would have carried on as the bitch, carried on being the mug.
In my opinion we should be trying to decouple ourselves from the donkey work for others we have got ourselves into over in Chagos.
At least a lease on an island may be far less complicated to legally transfer on at some point, than sovereignty.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
In the sense that France has its own nuclear deterrent fully independent of the US yes.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
It goes far deeper than that. We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
Were more than capable of surviving withput the US, our governments have just been inept in keeping our forces modern
We are - but the effort to disentangle ourselves would be a major one, and would take many years. Pretending otherwise is just silly.
IIm not pretending it would take time, it certainly will but I am saying it would be worthwhile putting the effort in.
Sadly with the Chagos surrender deal, the PB commentariat's raging, implacable determination to decouple our defences from Uncle Sam has proven as fleeting as some predicted.
We have lost our ability to act independently to further our own interests. Yes by all means have allies but quite frequently allies have different agendas. The bollocks of soft power has been by Putin, at the end of the day soft power means nothing if there is no hard power to back it up.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
Given per the article the only flag taken down so far has been the Ukrainian one, possibly you are misrepresenting them.
Evidence? You have one quote from Kent.
Moreover there have been complaints year in and year out about pride flags etc. so it may not have been seen in the last 3 weeks but that doesn’t mean it was the motivating factor
Evidence was the article you are complaining about.
Actually the story is a party that happily decries gesture politics in others trips up when indulging in performative flag banning themselves and they don't like it being pointed out.
The quote fron the article is:
one of Reform’s first acts was to take down the Ukrainian flag – hoisted to show solidarity with the war-besieged nation – and vowed not to fly rainbow-coloured flags in support of LGBTQ+ residents
Which demonstrates that it is not just about Ukraine but a broader campaign of nastiness. Which is exactly my point.
We're beating this to death but you claimed a factual statement was misrepresentation.
I’m even boring myself!
But the statement was So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag
That’s simply not true. At the very minimum Reform’s agenda included banning Palestinian and Pride flags.
If we swap out "no" for "little" we're sorted.
Yes we would… which why I was surprised that all the leftie clan decided to pile on 😂
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
Thatcher gets blamed for de-industrialisation, but the inflection point in our industrial output was actually under Blair.
No, Thatcher was the inflection point, marking the end of decades of semi-consensus.
Blair largely carried on with her policies towards industry.
What was Blair’s equivalent of bringing Nissan to Sunderland?
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
Given per the article the only flag taken down so far has been the Ukrainian one, possibly you are misrepresenting them.
Evidence? You have one quote from Kent.
Moreover there have been complaints year in and year out about pride flags etc. so it may not have been seen in the last 3 weeks but that doesn’t mean it was the motivating factor
Evidence was the article you are complaining about.
Actually the story is a party that happily decries gesture politics in others trips up when indulging in performative flag banning themselves and they don't like it being pointed out.
The quote fron the article is:
one of Reform’s first acts was to take down the Ukrainian flag – hoisted to show solidarity with the war-besieged nation – and vowed not to fly rainbow-coloured flags in support of LGBTQ+ residents
Which demonstrates that it is not just about Ukraine but a broader campaign of nastiness. Which is exactly my point.
We're beating this to death but you claimed a factual statement was misrepresentation.
I’m even boring myself!
But the statement was So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag
That’s simply not true. At the very minimum Reform’s agenda included banning Palestinian and Pride flags.
That seems like a minor error compared to many repeated here often (e.g. exaggerated costs of the Chagos deal, asylum seekers supposedly staying in 4* hotels).
Nope.
On Chagas - assuming they are accurate: I haven’t done the maths - it’s just discounted vs non discounted.
On 4* hotels I believe that you argue they no longer have the facilities that would win a 4* rating. But until they are reinspected they are a 4* hotel…
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Yes, he’s a very successful businessman, but actually my assessment didn't include Lowe.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
The record of businessmen in government isn't great, though. To an extent, they're different things.
Businesses can, should and do just stop doing stuff that isn't profitable. Government doesn't have that leeway.
LuckyGuy thinks the working class are going to be grateful when (after the rich get a huge tax cut) they get massive cuts to public spending or we have to go cap in hand to the IMF after the bond markets go into meltdown following a Tice budget (which again, will ultimately lead to massive public spending cuts).
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Yes, he’s a very successful businessman, but actually my assessment didn't include Lowe.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
The record of businessmen in government isn't great, though. To an extent, they're different things.
Businesses can, should and do just stop doing stuff that isn't profitable. Government doesn't have that leeway.
LuckyGuy thinks the working class are going to be grateful when (after the rich get a huge tax cut) they get massive cuts to public spending or we have to go cap in hand to the IMF after the bond markets go into meltdown following a Tice budget (which again, will ultimately lead to massive public spending cuts).
Looking at the current mess I think Reeves will get there before Tice ever does.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
That rather depends on how broke we are by then. Screaming high taxes and forced cutbacks could well be the backdrop to the next election.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
Unless Farage is planning to drop the huge tax cuts he wants that means more austerity, which many of the voters he needs are sick of.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
Farage already has power; look at the way other parties have been forced to dance to his tune. The question is whether he actually wants responsibility. I look at his track record, and I wonder.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
Thatcher gets blamed for de-industrialisation, but the inflection point in our industrial output was actually under Blair.
No, Thatcher was the inflection point, marking the end of decades of semi-consensus.
Blair largely carried on with her policies towards industry.
What was Blair’s equivalent of bringing Nissan to Sunderland?
Yes but without analysis, just by looking at the graphs, where is the inflection point? When did our economy fall off, or America's take off, and we move towards Europe? Without pinning down when, we are just replaying our favourite politicians' greatest hits.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
Possible but so far Farage's attraction is that he hasn't done the trade-offs. It's the basis of his success.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Yes, he’s a very successful businessman, but actually my assessment didn't include Lowe.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
Does the fetishization of 'business leaders' still have much to recommend it these days? Blair and Brown did it of course with 'the prawn-cocktail offensive', but I can't see what that led to other than some rather dodgy PPP schemes. And the British Right are always telling us how unproductive our businesses our, so that's not a ringing endorsement of their leaders either.
This is bizarre; Reeves and Starmer did little else in the run up to the GE other than court "business leaders"
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Net Zero is set the cost the British economy the same in today's money as World War II. And Starmer has just given away an island and arranged to hire it back for £30bn.
Good on you for having the balls to to talk about what the country can afford though - nice try.
Can't have the UK becoming self-reliant on energy and decoupled from hydrocarbon markets. That would mean we (and the rest of Europe) could sanction Russia properly without trashing our economies.
(We're currently at 100% domestic electricity generation and 91% non-fossil fuels. We're generating so much it's actually -£5 per MWh.)
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
Yet for some reason you are delighted that 'the two main parties' have protected us from 'extremists' - when its obvious that our state setup is absolutely inimical to prosperity.
And you imagine that Reform will improve that state of affairs ? LOL
Your LOLs are just a signal of your own ignorance at this point. Reform's front bench has vastly more business experience than Labour's (not hard as Labour's has zero). Considering Labour has 402 MPs and Reform has 5, that is a massively damning situation. Why would a party that actually knows how to make money rather than just spend it not improve the situation for businesses?
Well, Rupert Lowe certainly has some business experience. Oh, wait...
Yes, he’s a very successful businessman, but actually my assessment didn't include Lowe.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
Does the fetishization of 'business leaders' still have much to recommend it these days? Blair and Brown did it of course with 'the prawn-cocktail offensive', but I can't see what that led to other than some rather dodgy PPP schemes. And the British Right are always telling us how unproductive our businesses our, so that's not a ringing endorsement of their leaders either.
This is bizarre; Reeves and Starmer did little else in the run up to the GE other than court "business leaders"
Every election needs a letter signed by some twats who run businesses to tell us thickos who to vote for. Do nothing until Tom Kerridge pronounces
Edit - unless Adam Ricketts or Billy Braggs endorsements differ, then use the Gaffney tiebreaker
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
Farage already has power; look at the way other parties have been forced to dance to his tune. The question is whether he actually wants responsibility. I look at his track record, and I wonder.
Farage is offering A and B, knowing full well that you can have A or B but not both. It will get picked apart before the next election, which is why I won't be surprised to see him leave front-line politics. Maybe in favour of making some serious money - flogging Trump coins or some such. With his legs cut from under him, I doubt Tice will be able to deliver Reform polling in the teens.
Thought these lines on economic performance very enlightening. Had little idea there had been such a divergence between Europe and the US. It seems rising prosperity is no protection from political bampots.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
When was the inflection point? Are we blaming Norman Lamont, Gordon Brown or George Osborne?
Thatcher gets blamed for de-industrialisation, but the inflection point in our industrial output was actually under Blair.
No, Thatcher was the inflection point, marking the end of decades of semi-consensus.
Blair largely carried on with her policies towards industry.
What was Blair’s equivalent of bringing Nissan to Sunderland?
Yes but without analysis, just by looking at the graphs, where is the inflection point? When did our economy fall off, or America's take off, and we move towards Europe? Without pinning down when, we are just replaying our favourite politicians' greatest hits.
GDP per capita can be a rather misleading stat. A lot of the discontent in the USA is middle class (both blue and white collar) incomes have stagnated while the richest have had their incomes or capital massively increase.
It's part of the American psyche that this has benefited MAGA Republicans, in Europe it would probably benefit the left wing populists as much or more. Indeed one of Reforms achillies heels is that the leadership is super rich, while the average Reform voter is in the economic doldrums. Sooner or later that discrepancy will become open conflict.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
Farage already has power; look at the way other parties have been forced to dance to his tune. The question is whether he actually wants responsibility. I look at his track record, and I wonder.
Farage is offering A and B, knowing full well that you can have A or B but not both. It will get picked apart before the next election, which is why I won't be surprised to see him leave front-line politics. Maybe in favour of making some serious money - flogging Trump coins or some such. With his legs cut from under him, I doubt Tice will be able to deliver Reform polling in the teens.
Tice has already shown us how shit he is as leader. It will be Anderson. Until he joins Mebyon Kernow
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
They have the confidence to tell people to fuck off.
SSW simply doesn't understand negotiating. He thinks if the other side makes a demand, they must have a point.
He's predisposed to believe them because he's secretly ashamed of his own country.
I'd have gone the other way: threaten Mauritius with trade sanctions and a blockade for their impertinence, and then followed through until they shut up.
Sometimes the double-down Trumpy approach is the way to go.
So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag - perhaps unsurprising given Farage's past relationship with Russia Today. The comments from the independent Durham councillor at the end of the article seem quite perceptive. I would guess a Reform government would be quite a disappointment to its supporters. Complex problems are not easily fixed by simplistic solutions.
They are not taking down the Ukrainian flag. They are taking down all flags except the union flag, cross of st. George and county flags.
I’m not a Reform supporter and will never vote for Farage. But this sort of misrepresentation just pisses me when off. This board relies on accurate information / assessment for people to for their betting judgements.
It’s not misrepresentation, it’s precisely what they are doing.
Though the other attitude these defences of Reform show is hardly wholesome: “it’s ok they aren’t targeting Ukraine, just the gays”.
Just how credulous can you be? The ultimate flag-shaggers suddenly have a strop about people flying some flags.
It can only be interpreted as opposition to those movements that are currently represented by flags. The Ukrainian flag is a common symbol of support for Ukraine (my local church flies it); not making an exception for it is all the evidence you need.
My point is it is not *just* about Ukraine and to represent it as such is misleading
The flag policy as a whole? Perhaps.
Keeping the ban on the Ukrainian flag, after it has been pointed out to them and it would be trivial to move the line of acceptability? That is absolutely a deliberate decision.
Я is for Яeform. Я is for Яussia.
What exactly would be the point on a blanket ban of flying all flags of causes célèbres, swapping them for the union flag, if the rule were to be immediately disregarded for really really really really really IMPORTANT ones. There would be special pleading by every group, and they would be flying the flag for gay hedgehog week within months.
This is a sensible and patriotic policy, and Grimes' answer was a good and heartening one.
Patriotic lol. Farage has been Putin's leading British useful idiot for decades, taking £000s to appear on Russian propaganda TV and furthering Putin's goal of weakening the EU by campaigning for Brexit. The latest move is part of the Russian effort at softening the Western public's support for Ukraine. Taking down the flags is only step one.
As a Brit, the rise of Farage and the Trumpification of British politics is the worst political development of my lifetime.
All those years worrying about the extreme Left...and the incoming disaster is coming from the Right.
The Conservative Party really does have to get its act together - something which is as much in the interest of the Centre Left as it is of the moderate right.
LOL youve spent your life wishing the Conservatives would die and now youve got your wish
I'd have gone the other way: threaten Mauritius with trade sanctions and a blockade for their impertinence, and then followed through until they shut up.
Sometimes the double-down Trumpy approach is the way to go.
Flood their island with people called Maurice. It will cause chaos.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
We tried BoZo as PM to "get Brexit out of our system"
I'd have gone the other way: threaten Mauritius with trade sanctions and a blockade for their impertinence, and then followed through until they shut up.
Sometimes the double-down Trumpy approach is the way to go.
Flood their island with people called Maurice. It will cause chaos.
Especially if they sell sea shells in the Seychelles...
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
Um. Algeria. French Indo-China.
France had an absolute shocker. Largely because they tried to hold on by sheer force of arms, and took the gloves off.
The only bit they got right was in the 1960s and thereafter when they incorporated the bits left into overseas departments.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
We tried BoZo as PM to "get Brexit out of our system"
How did that work out?
Quite well - it proved he should never have been anywhere near power and won’t be again.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
Unless Farage is planning to drop the huge tax cuts he wants that means more austerity, which many of the voters he needs are sick of.
The only "austerity" there has been is in properly funding core functions of the state.
We are still spraying the cash round to people who aren't working, who aren't grateful for it and always complain there's not enough of it.
If we really believe in decolonisation shouldn't we be handing the Chagos Islands back to the original settlers there, the French?
I suspect they would have been happy to lease it to the US for about $1bn a year.
You have to look at the needs and wants of all involved. In order of importance and clout:
The US needs their tenure at "Footprint of Freedom" secured without any legal complications for the long term. They want somebody else to pay for this.
The UK government needs to feel liked by the US. They also want to be perceived as the benevolent face of imperialism. The good kind of expropriation and ethnic cleansing. They also still have some regard for international law and complying with it allows them to take their preferred position of impotent sanctimony when other countries violate it like China with its island and reef acquisition spree.
The Mauritius government needs money and wants its anti-colonial credentials burnished.
The Chagoswegians need and want money.
Given all of those various motivations, it's hard to see any other course than the SKS deal. Playing for time or telling everyone to fuck off isn't a viable strategy due to inexorable and irresistible pressure from the US.
The french have been telling everyone to fuck off for decades and eventually they do.
The French are militarily independent of the U.S. We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
Um. Algeria. French Indo-China.
France had an absolute shocker. Largely because they tried to hold on by sheer force of arms, and took the gloves off.
The only bit they got right was in the 1960s and thereafter when they incorporated the bits left into overseas departments.
De Gaulle’s basic fear was that with military victory in Algeria, (and the French did pretty much win at the military level), would come full French citizenship for Algerians, and then mass migration to France.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
What should really worry you is that they won't do that. See the complaints from the Guardian about how little they have 'achieved' having had control of some councils for 3 weeks. I think they're cautions, serious and in it for the long haul. All whilst Starmer is shitting the Labour bed so badly you'll be lucky to be polling in the high teens come the next election.
As I said earlier, there's actually very little an incoming administration (especially one filled with new councillors) can do in the first three weeks.
The first thing ALL Reform Councillors (and any new Councillor) should do is go to Members' Induction where they meet senior officers and get a sense of what the Council does - the various Services - and the rules under which they, as Members of the Council, have to operate such as Member-Officer protocols, how to deal with constituent correspondence (they'll be given a laptop and a phone for Council business only), the legal requirements over Freedom of Information requests etc.
It's a lot to take in and even more for complete outsiders. I'd argue before seeking to overturn the system it's not a bad idea to get a sense of how the current system works.
I'm torn over Reform. Sometimes I think: let's just get Nigel as PM and get it out of our system sooner rather than later. But then I remember that they'll probably aim to mimic Trump 2 but in an even more triumphalist, confrontational, manic and outlandish way, and I get worried again.
I don’t think Farage is as instinctively chaotic as Trump, for what it’s worth. I think he has a bit more of a clearer vision (it wouldn’t be hard). That doesn’t mean that he couldn’t cause a lot of difficulties and fallout along the way, particularly where markets are concerned, and potentially in cases of national security and European co-operation.
I don't think Farage is quite as malevolent as Trump but what the two have in common is an extremely self indulgent politics their respective countries can't afford, particularly Britain can't afford. Could Farage pivot to practical governing once he's in power? Possible but he has never given the slightest indication.
Well at some point we are going to find out how much Farage really wants power. Because as we approach an election he will need to be strategic on Reform’s positioning, particularly on the economics and the NHS. Currently, I’m not convinced he has either of those two areas fully figured out. If he wants power he will adapt and moderate somewhat in both of those areas.
Unless Farage is planning to drop the huge tax cuts he wants that means more austerity, which many of the voters he needs are sick of.
The only "austerity" there has been is in properly funding core functions of the state.
We are still spraying the cash round to people who aren't working, who aren't grateful for it and always complain there's not enough of it.
Would it help if the elderly, sick and disabled came and grovelled regularly before selected representatives of proper people, to demonstrate how humbly grateful they were for the means of staying alive?
Comments
But the statement was So far Reform's agenda in local government seems to extend no further than taking down the Ukrainian flag
That’s simply not true. At the very minimum Reform’s agenda included banning Palestinian and Pride flags.
People join parties and become active with at least a vague idea of what they are (meant to be) standing up for
Low taxes, small state, social conservatism, free market
Unions, the working class, redistribution, welfare state, social democracy
Liberalism, orange bookery, the care services, PR
Save the planet, eco activism
Independence for Scotland, Wales
Then we have Britain needs Reform but it has no ideas and no principles and no road map, it's just a dumping ground for the thoroughly pissed off. Just getting jnto politics because you're pissed off with it all is a dangerous road. When we are chanting 'you don't know what you're doing!' At them it will be because they don't, it's just angry people being angry and wanting to amorphously 'change stuff'
What Reform do we need?
Everyone on minimum wage in assigned jobs?
Mandatory life sentences for crime?
UBI?
Luddite attacks on solar infrastructure?
Vigilante policing?
Privatised health?
A bigger army? Navy? Space force?
Unless there is some definition, soon, we end up with this behemoth running everything but having zero idea what to do and it will all unravel very very fast.
They strike me as Syriza types - a knee jerk reaction that might implode.
Sorry, just fancied a ranty musing
All those years worrying about the extreme Left...and the incoming disaster is coming from the Right.
The Conservative Party really does have to get its act together - something which is as much in the interest of the Centre Left as it is of the moderate right.
@robfordmancs.bsky.social
· 1h
Just pondering next year's locals - suspect they are going to be even more turbulent, and even more painful for both traditional governing parties, than this month's were. Last up in 2022 - before Truss, before Gaza, before Reform, before Labour's poll collapse in govt...
Rob Ford
@robfordmancs.bsky.social
Follow
All of London up, all of Birmingham up, seats up in most of the big metro boroughs where Labour start strong, and in lots of the Southern districts where Tories held up in 2022 (but where Reform surged in the equivalent counties this month). Its all going to get very, very messy.
In 1995, Germany’s nominal GDP per capita was a little higher ($32,000) than that of the United States ($29,000), with the United Kingdom lagging behind at a noticeable distance ($23,000) . . . Since then, the two continents have markedly diverged. To an extent that few people have fully internalized, an economic gulf has opened up between America and Europe. On average, Americans are now nearly twice as rich as Europeans. According to the latest available data for GDP per capita, the United States stands at $83,000, with Germany at $54,000 and the United Kingdom at $50,000.”
The idea that anyone in the region might ever again have cause to fear us is amusing.
The UK flag represents us all. I am glad that it is being flown in favour of sectional and cause célèbre flags. I hope the message is internalised and that all employees and elected officials come to realise that they are there to serve the country, not jump on the latest sectional bandwagon.
2022 Con 34 Lab 40 ish start of May
Tories defending far less in 2026 and will have London where they are already much more hollowed out to ameliorate losses. There's no way (unless they have totally imploded by then) that will be worse for them - they are unlikely to lose all their councils this time (Harrow etc likely stay blue imo) and they were nationally 10 points worse off in 2022 so not defending from such a perch. That said it will be a further retreat for them.
Labour, however..........
French Revolution stuff
We very much aren't.
It wouldn't be impossible to change that, but it might take a decade or so. And require a lot more than 2.5% of GDP.
France both did a lot worse, and a lot better than us when they disengaged from most of their empire.
https://youtu.be/v2vrqudKGYs?feature=shared
But Cameron wasn't far wrong with his fruitcakes and loonies quote.
France also withdrew from NATO under De Gaulle in 1966 and did not rejoin until Sarkozy in 2009
We wouldn't have much of a navy or airforce without US kit.
https://www.reuters.com/world/france-says-it-diverted-british-fishing-boat-french-waters-without-correct-2025-05-23/
See, France is doing its bit to stop the boats.
Well, we wouldn't wish to upset the Putinists would we?
LOL
https://www.tiktok.com/@zandernation/video/7001962572521934086
Blair largely carried on with her policies towards industry.
Good on you for having the balls to to talk about what the country can afford though - nice try.
Pretending otherwise is just silly.
Interesting you should mention him though - that means even Reform's ex MP contingent has more business experience than the Labour front bench.
Businesses can, should and do just stop doing stuff that isn't profitable. Government doesn't have that leeway.
There’s the clearer story of being hauled into court on Chagos. Not China driving it, but India.
(I put all this in the header btw)
And what’s UK been doing whilst “friends” have been burying the British Empire, expunging last traces of it, clipping away at our influence around the region like a back street vet neutering a dog? We’ve interlocked ourselves into the expensive catalogue of US weaponry. We’ve got the hit of ethnic cleansing the Chagos, and the ongoing mess from that we saw outside a court house last week. And we brought both India and US into the negotiating room to help write this lease agreement.
When PBers post “we should have kept sovereignty, simples” I put it to you - isn’t that the preferred option Washington wanted in the first place? their bitch to keep the sovereignty, carry on doing the dirty work, until India’s campaign against us made it all the more difficult?
When you look at this bigger picture, from sixties to now, what the word Chagos should mean in the English language is “the UK have been mugs” all these years doing the heavy lifting for others, and getting what back exactly? Keeping the sovereignty as you say, I say naively, thoughtlessly, glibly,, artlessly you keep insisting we should have kept the sovereignty, we would have carried on as the bitch, carried on being the mug.
In my opinion we should be trying to decouple ourselves from the donkey work for others we have got ourselves into over in Chagos.
At least a lease on an island may be far less complicated to legally transfer on at some point, than sovereignty.
On Chagas - assuming they are accurate: I haven’t done the maths - it’s just discounted vs non discounted.
On 4* hotels I believe that you argue they no longer have the facilities that would win a 4* rating. But until they are reinspected they are a 4* hotel…
Betting PostF1: backed Hamilton each way in qualifying at 19 (boosted).
https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2025/05/monaco-grand-prix-2025-pre-qualifying.html
Edited: worth mentioning his car does have to be repaired.
I hope it also turns out profitable.
(We're currently at 100% domestic electricity generation and 91% non-fossil fuels. We're generating so much it's actually -£5 per MWh.)
Do nothing until Tom Kerridge pronounces
Edit - unless Adam Ricketts or Billy Braggs endorsements differ, then use the Gaffney tiebreaker
It's part of the American psyche that this has benefited MAGA Republicans, in Europe it would probably benefit the left wing populists as much or more. Indeed one of Reforms achillies heels is that the leadership is super rich, while the average Reform voter is in the economic doldrums. Sooner or later that discrepancy will become open conflict.
It will be Anderson. Until he joins Mebyon Kernow
Seems a British Fishing boat has been seized by he French for illegal fishing
Just the incident Starmer must dread and as for Farage !!!
SSW simply doesn't understand negotiating. He thinks if the other side makes a demand, they must have a point.
He's predisposed to believe them because he's secretly ashamed of his own country.
Sometimes the double-down Trumpy approach is the way to go.
How did the French find a British fishing boat?
You might get it.
Gendarme! Arrestez le Messiah, il n'avait pas le license!!
How did that work out?
France had an absolute shocker. Largely because they tried to hold on by sheer force of arms, and took the gloves off.
The only bit they got right was in the 1960s and thereafter when they incorporated the bits left into overseas departments.
We are still spraying the cash round to people who aren't working, who aren't grateful for it and always complain there's not enough of it.
The first thing ALL Reform Councillors (and any new Councillor) should do is go to Members' Induction where they meet senior officers and get a sense of what the Council does - the various Services - and the rules under which they, as Members of the Council, have to operate such as Member-Officer protocols, how to deal with constituent correspondence (they'll be given a laptop and a phone for Council business only), the legal requirements over Freedom of Information requests etc.
It's a lot to take in and even more for complete outsiders. I'd argue before seeking to overturn the system it's not a bad idea to get a sense of how the current system works.