I expect the two child benefit cap will go in November mostly funded by an increase in gambling taxes . This no 10 will hope will reduce the appeal of Your party .
An increase in gambling taxes is low hanging fruit and won’t be controversial for the vast majority of the public .
Good morning
Another unpopular measure according to the polls, and does nothing to address Reeves 'all my very own deep hole' in the public finances
Why doesn't she focus on all the popular ways to increase taxes and cut spending? It's exasperating.
Truth is that income tax has to rise, but she cannot do that because of her idiotic pre election promises
Also you do not raise taxes to address a huge hole in the public finances and use some of that tax raising to create another spending commitment
Do you think whoever is leading the tory party at the next GE will do into it promising to raise income tax because I don't.
Labour are a high tax high spend government and it is not in their DNA to cut spending
Conservatives are low tax low spending and I would expect a conservative government to reduce corporation tax, encourage wealth creation and abolish IHT on farmers. I would also expect a review of all net zero subsidies
Why on earth would you expect them to do that? Most of that is at odds with their time in office - particularly on renewables and farmers.
Any party that is focussed on a pensioner voting cohort like the Conservatives is going to high tax, high spend.
Cameron and Osborne certainly cut spending as a percentage of gdp and cut tax at all income levels, including a big inheritance tax cut.
Kemi has said she will take an axe to spending, especially welfare spending and net zero spending etc and at one stage even proposed means testing the triple lock
How much did the national debt increase during the last Conservative government?
Because of lockdown, Cameron and Osborne certainly cut it compared to what Brown left
You’d think someone interested in politics would understand the difference between the deficit and the debt but you’ve never been good with numbers.
You did not just say national debt, you said national debt increase, the national debt increase was lower under Cameron and Clegg and Osborne than Brown and Darling
Are you trying to argue that the national debt didn’t increase between 2010 and 2024? Because it did. Massively.
It increased at a lower rate than under Brown and Darling, certainly pre lockdown
And yet the national debt increased. Massively. Strong financial management by the Tories. Bravo.
Spending as a percentage of gdp was 47% when Brown left office in 2010, falling to 41% when Cameron left office in 2016
Maybe, but that isn’t the national debt. That’s a different statistic entirely.
It led to the decline in increase in the national debt
Maybe. But yet the national debt still increased over the 14 years you were in power. Massively.
What additional cuts would you have made to balance the budget and run a surplus?
I'd double council tax. That's the current deficit wiped out (nearly) in one go.
A freeze on hospital spending, abolish stamp duty, NICs/IT merger. Borrow as much for capital investment as the markets allow.
I honestly don't see the point in borrowing for capital investment when the cost of infrastructure is so high. We need to actually work to remove all of those barriers before we even think about that. Again, it just seems absolutely criminal to me that building a third runway at Heathrow will cost £49bn, even the short runway will come in at £21bn. This is just one example, there's suggestions that the next nuclear plant will be £70bn while Korea builds all of this similar infrastructure at a tenth of the cost. It's not as though their living standards are substantially different to ours.
It's not universally bad. We've had some good projects in Scotland. Queensferry Crossing came in under budget and on time. Small stuff, incremental stuff, tends to go ok.
I think you've fallen for the trap of thinking in terms of billions, not millions. The odd town bypass, new tram routes, a few million on cycle lanes, rail electrification, phone masts, a public health investment. That can add up to billions, but you've diversified across projects so that one disaster doesn't cause the whole investment to collapse.
Yes lots of small projects can add up to a decent gain, yet it's the big projects that will move the needle. The problem we have is the government treats it like something like HS2 as a 5x 55 point unrelated tickets instead of an epic with 150x 3 point tickets.
One of my best mates was previously on the project and he was sitting around being paid £650 per day to do nothing because there just wasn't anything for him to do but they'd contracted him from a set date to a set date but that work was so badly delayed that for the whole 3 months of the contract he got paid to be "on call" and then once work finally did commence they had to call him and his crew back at an even higher rate. That's about 25 electricians of varying skill level on day rates because they declined to do the fixed price deal he offered as it was "too restrictive" due to him setting a specific time to start and finish, requiring the site to be handed in a certain way and all materials etc... to be delivered to a tight schedule and completing the project over 4.5 months. In the end it took them 3 months of doing nothing, then another 6 months of actual work and the overall cost was 2.5x what he offered in the fixed price contract.
I have no doubt that this small example isn't the only one where inept public sector project managers and consultants who don't know what they're doing end up pissing public money into the wind because there's zero repercussions.
That’s nuts, and you know that exactly the same scenario would have played out for every single other trade on the project. Thousands of people people each paid hundreds of pounds a day to do nothing productive.
That - on a massive scale - is what I saw and experienced all day every day during my time in 'investment banking'. And not a government or public sector employee in sight.
The difference being that investment banking inefficiencies are a problem for the bank management and shareholders, as opposed to taxpayers being forcibly relieved of their money under penalty of imprisonment.
Except it is a drag on everyone else and in 08/09 led to an enormous direct call on public money.
That was Gordon Brown’s fault from the beginning to the end. Many banks should have been allowed to fail, with insured deposits and safe mortgages kept in some sort of a government bank that could have been floated later.
Oh for heaven's sake. Are you for real?
What is the problem with banks failing? If they are not allied to fail, they should not be allowed to make profit. Profit is the reward for risk.
Usually yes. But in 08 the whole system was close to collapse. You can't just let that happen.
I've changed my mind today. I used to think The Hundred was a rubbish idea but after attending one of the double matches today at Edgbaston I've decided they're fantastic. A brilliant idea from whoever came up with it.
Why is it better to put this on a wall rather than some random art by someone else (*waves at @TOPPING*)?
What makes this special? Why have I put it on the wall in my revamping new living room?
Answers on an antique parchment
Are you the one on the left or the one on the right?
This is a tricky one. Here's the long answer (@Sunil_Prasannan was on the right road)
So I have a long association with Gobekli Tepe. I first went, on my own shilling, on the off chance, as a youngish hungry freelancer in 2006 to write one of the first major articles on the whole place, back when it was basically unknown. The article went viral and halfway made me as a writer
I went out again in 2023 and - because by then I was well known to them - the main archaeologists showed me all the incredible new sites. Especially Karahan Tepe. Etc. These collective sites are now known as the Tas Tepeler
But then on day 3 as we were driving around Necmul the head Turkish boffin of the whole Tas Tepeler said “sod it Leon I'm going to show you something new, we only found this three months ago”. So we abruply diverted to this tiny village in the desert which had obvious Tepe like pillars propping up farm walls, it was like driving to Stonehenge and en route finding a Wiltshire village using megaliths as door frames (only much much older). And then Necmul led me past some chickens to a small stone door and at the doorway he said “the villagers found this when they were emptying a barn a few weeks ago, and they called us in”
Inside that barn was that rock frieze, perhaps 12,000 years old. With the classic Gobekli animals in profile - the horned bull - a man dying maybe - a leopard - and then the fascinating figure of a small strange man holding his penis, with the iconic chevrons on his chest - all motifs used across the Tas Tepeler. In other words, what I was seeing was pretty much final, conclusive proof that Gobekli Tepe and the tas Tepeler actually represent an entire buried 13,000 year old civilisation, which we completely do not understand and might have had writing and was highly sophisticated. Possibly as advanced as the Egyptians but 8000 years earlier. We have no idea how and why and who and what
And Necmul told me, as we stood in that barn, "only a few people have ever seen this. A handful of us archaeologists, one or two academics, now you - this is the first time it’s been revealed since the Ice Age”
The boy was a son of a local farmer who wandered in. And stood by the frieze because he was having fun and we decided he was was good for scale as we took photos
That is why this unique photo, by me, hangs on my wall, instead of any "art" by someone else
To add to the poignancy, the flat I live in now was bought entirely from the earnings from my original thriller based on my first visit to Gobekli Tepe. If these alien-Nephilim with six fingers hadn't build a mad now-buried civilisation, I wouldn't have this flat. Funny how things turn out. I wonder if that was a motivation for them. "In 13,000 years time some English dude will be able to buy a flat, because we have six fingers and we're building underground cities during the Ice Age"
You should really get someone to pitch you to Joe Rogan as a podcast interview. He’s totally obsessed by stuff like Gobekli Tepe.
He also said that Candace Owens allegations about Ms Macron actually being a man* were obviously true, because otherwise she (Owens) would have been sued. I think he said her six part expose was one of the most impressive things he'd ever watched.
* And that's only the tip of the bonkersness of the Owens claims.
Isn’t Candace Owens now getting sued by Macron?
Yes.
My point is that Rogan is a really bright and interesting guy, who ends up being a net negative for the world, because he's happy to spread the kind of shit that is clearly completely bat shit crazy.
As Rogan says himself, he’s a stupid comedian, but inquisitive and honest in his own thoughts.
As I’ve said before, it’s way better to have the likes of Rogan and Jordon Peterson be role models to young men, than the likes of Andrew Tate and Nick Fuentes.
Why is it better to put this on a wall rather than some random art by someone else (*waves at @TOPPING*)?
What makes this special? Why have I put it on the wall in my revamping new living room?
Answers on an antique parchment
Are you the one on the left or the one on the right?
This is a tricky one. Here's the long answer (@Sunil_Prasannan was on the right road)
So I have a long association with Gobekli Tepe. I first went, on my own shilling, on the off chance, as a youngish hungry freelancer in 2006 to write one of the first major articles on the whole place, back when it was basically unknown. The article went viral and halfway made me as a writer
I went out again in 2023 and - because by then I was well known to them - the main archaeologists showed me all the incredible new sites. Especially Karahan Tepe. Etc. These collective sites are now known as the Tas Tepeler
But then on day 3 as we were driving around Necmul the head Turkish boffin of the whole Tas Tepeler said “sod it Leon I'm going to show you something new, we only found this three months ago”. So we abruply diverted to this tiny village in the desert which had obvious Tepe like pillars propping up farm walls, it was like driving to Stonehenge and en route finding a Wiltshire village using megaliths as door frames (only much much older). And then Necmul led me past some chickens to a small stone door and at the doorway he said “the villagers found this when they were emptying a barn a few weeks ago, and they called us in”
Inside that barn was that rock frieze, perhaps 12,000 years old. With the classic Gobekli animals in profile - the horned bull - a man dying maybe - a leopard - and then the fascinating figure of a small strange man holding his penis, with the iconic chevrons on his chest - all motifs used across the Tas Tepeler. In other words, what I was seeing was pretty much final, conclusive proof that Gobekli Tepe and the tas Tepeler actually represent an entire buried 13,000 year old civilisation, which we completely do not understand and might have had writing and was highly sophisticated. Possibly as advanced as the Egyptians but 8000 years earlier. We have no idea how and why and who and what
And Necmul told me, as we stood in that barn, "only a few people have ever seen this. A handful of us archaeologists, one or two academics, now you - this is the first time it’s been revealed since the Ice Age”
The boy was a son of a local farmer who wandered in. And stood by the frieze because he was having fun and we decided he was was good for scale as we took photos
That is why this unique photo, by me, hangs on my wall, instead of any "art" by someone else
To add to the poignancy, the flat I live in now was bought entirely from the earnings from my original thriller based on my first visit to Gobekli Tepe. If these alien-Nephilim with six fingers hadn't build a mad now-buried civilisation, I wouldn't have this flat. Funny how things turn out. I wonder if that was a motivation for them. "In 13,000 years time some English dude will be able to buy a flat, because we have six fingers and we're building underground cities during the Ice Age"
You should really get someone to pitch you to Joe Rogan as a podcast interview. He’s totally obsessed by stuff like Gobekli Tepe.
I'm thinking of writing a non-fiction book about it; I like Graham Hancock but he does go a bit mad with his relentless thesis
You don't need any of his comet-strike, global-civilisation-is-hidden stuff to make Gobekli and the Tas Tepeler completely mindblowing
Who built it? How? Without writing, or pottery, or agriculture? Really???? In 12,000BC (some latest datings put it back to 15,000 BC). Also they had kitchens, and running water, and advanced urban rituals - in theatres and shrines - and all this at a time when humanity was supposedly living in caves. But if they did not have agriculture how did they feed these towns? Becuase these are basically small but highly sophisticated towns being unearthed
What was their religion? What's with the six fingers and SCARY skull cults? Why do they have the same clothes? A uniform? Ritual scars? What's the obsession with penises? The blood chambers? The vulture worship? The exquisite stone work? Where did they learn all this? WERE THEY JUST FUCKING ALIENS????
I have a theory that mainstream archaeologists avoid the whole subject because it so so mad, aberrant and jarringly weird, and surreal, as soon as you talk about it you sound mad. So they tiptoe around it, to preserve their careers
Anyway, now one of the most iconic photos of the whole place (and I have taken quite a few iconic photos of Gobekli Tepe, often used in TV documentaries) is now proudly hanging on my wall
Without going all the way with Graham Hancock, it does seem that pre-industrial civilisations can be very sophisticated, far more sophisticated than we would once have believed, but they can also vanish extremely rapidly, if they get hit by disease, adverse environmental changes, declining food supplies, or destroyed by enemies.
One example is Portuguese and Spanish explorers recording well-populated Indian cities in the Amazon basin in the late 1500’s, which largely disappeared without trace, and were covered by jungle. These were largely thought to be travellers’ tales, until modern archaeologists confirmed their existence. They likely collapsed due to diseases contacted from Europeans. The descendants of the survivors rapidly forgot their technical knowledge, as the economic basis for urban life disappeared.
Paradoxically, that much-reduced population can appear healthier than the former much bigger urban population, but that’s a survivorship bias.
And, I wonder if we see a reverse effect, with the coming of agriculture and the formation of the first towns. It may not be that the population grew weaker, it’s just that the weak now survived in greater numbers than before, as populations expanded.
Indeed. And @Sunil_Prasannan is on to something with his sea-level coastline thesis
I find it entirely conceivable that a truly advanced human civilisation rose declined and fell before the end of the ice age, and was essentially obliterated - with just fragments of folk memory and maybe some technology surviving in scattered places
Indeed the Tas Tepeler are essentially that. Utterly inexplicable in terms of regular archaeological timelines
And of course what we see in Turkey may be the END of their civilisation - not its peak flowering
Personally I reckon they had writing. 8000 years before Sumer. Privately I’ve had archaeologists out there agree with me. But they don’t go on record because it is risky to sound like “Graham Hancock”
Did these previous civilisations or what could have been observed of them 10,000 years ago create the pervasive legends of the flood that is found in so many places around the middle east in particular, I wonder.
I’ve wondered that. The idea of a great early civilisation being swept away is basically The Flood. Why it should not be aurally preserved and then eventually written down?
Ditto the garden of Eden myth. That is surely the decline from hunter gathering to farming turned into a biblical story. We used to wander a garden plucking fruit and eating game, then we were cast out of this paradise, and Adam had to “till the field with the sweat of his brow” - ie he had to farm
As we’ve discussed on pb, the shift to farming meant more food for more people, but actual daily life got worse for nearly everyone - more work, more zoonotic diseases, shorter lives, and smaller stature. Humans literally shrank
There were supposed to be FOUR major rivers in the Garden of Eden, right?
I expect the two child benefit cap will go in November mostly funded by an increase in gambling taxes . This no 10 will hope will reduce the appeal of Your party .
An increase in gambling taxes is low hanging fruit and won’t be controversial for the vast majority of the public .
Good morning
Another unpopular measure according to the polls, and does nothing to address Reeves 'all my very own deep hole' in the public finances
Why doesn't she focus on all the popular ways to increase taxes and cut spending? It's exasperating.
Truth is that income tax has to rise, but she cannot do that because of her idiotic pre election promises
Also you do not raise taxes to address a huge hole in the public finances and use some of that tax raising to create another spending commitment
Do you think whoever is leading the tory party at the next GE will do into it promising to raise income tax because I don't.
Labour are a high tax high spend government and it is not in their DNA to cut spending
Conservatives are low tax low spending and I would expect a conservative government to reduce corporation tax, encourage wealth creation and abolish IHT on farmers. I would also expect a review of all net zero subsidies
Why on earth would you expect them to do that? Most of that is at odds with their time in office - particularly on renewables and farmers.
Any party that is focussed on a pensioner voting cohort like the Conservatives is going to high tax, high spend.
Cameron and Osborne certainly cut spending as a percentage of gdp and cut tax at all income levels, including a big inheritance tax cut.
Kemi has said she will take an axe to spending, especially welfare spending and net zero spending etc and at one stage even proposed means testing the triple lock
How much did the national debt increase during the last Conservative government?
Because of lockdown, Cameron and Osborne certainly cut it compared to what Brown left
You’d think someone interested in politics would understand the difference between the deficit and the debt but you’ve never been good with numbers.
You did not just say national debt, you said national debt increase, the national debt increase was lower under Cameron and Clegg and Osborne than Brown and Darling
Are you trying to argue that the national debt didn’t increase between 2010 and 2024? Because it did. Massively.
It increased at a lower rate than under Brown and Darling, certainly pre lockdown
And yet the national debt increased. Massively. Strong financial management by the Tories. Bravo.
Spending as a percentage of gdp was 47% when Brown left office in 2010, falling to 41% when Cameron left office in 2016
Maybe, but that isn’t the national debt. That’s a different statistic entirely.
It led to the decline in increase in the national debt
Maybe. But yet the national debt still increased over the 14 years you were in power. Massively.
What additional cuts would you have made to balance the budget and run a surplus?
I'd double council tax. That's the current deficit wiped out (nearly) in one go.
A freeze on hospital spending, abolish stamp duty, NICs/IT merger. Borrow as much for capital investment as the markets allow.
I honestly don't see the point in borrowing for capital investment when the cost of infrastructure is so high. We need to actually work to remove all of those barriers before we even think about that. Again, it just seems absolutely criminal to me that building a third runway at Heathrow will cost £49bn, even the short runway will come in at £21bn. This is just one example, there's suggestions that the next nuclear plant will be £70bn while Korea builds all of this similar infrastructure at a tenth of the cost. It's not as though their living standards are substantially different to ours.
It's not universally bad. We've had some good projects in Scotland. Queensferry Crossing came in under budget and on time. Small stuff, incremental stuff, tends to go ok.
I think you've fallen for the trap of thinking in terms of billions, not millions. The odd town bypass, new tram routes, a few million on cycle lanes, rail electrification, phone masts, a public health investment. That can add up to billions, but you've diversified across projects so that one disaster doesn't cause the whole investment to collapse.
Yes lots of small projects can add up to a decent gain, yet it's the big projects that will move the needle. The problem we have is the government treats it like something like HS2 as a 5x 55 point unrelated tickets instead of an epic with 150x 3 point tickets.
One of my best mates was previously on the project and he was sitting around being paid £650 per day to do nothing because there just wasn't anything for him to do but they'd contracted him from a set date to a set date but that work was so badly delayed that for the whole 3 months of the contract he got paid to be "on call" and then once work finally did commence they had to call him and his crew back at an even higher rate. That's about 25 electricians of varying skill level on day rates because they declined to do the fixed price deal he offered as it was "too restrictive" due to him setting a specific time to start and finish, requiring the site to be handed in a certain way and all materials etc... to be delivered to a tight schedule and completing the project over 4.5 months. In the end it took them 3 months of doing nothing, then another 6 months of actual work and the overall cost was 2.5x what he offered in the fixed price contract.
I have no doubt that this small example isn't the only one where inept public sector project managers and consultants who don't know what they're doing end up pissing public money into the wind because there's zero repercussions.
That’s nuts, and you know that exactly the same scenario would have played out for every single other trade on the project. Thousands of people people each paid hundreds of pounds a day to do nothing productive.
That - on a massive scale - is what I saw and experienced all day every day during my time in 'investment banking'. And not a government or public sector employee in sight.
The difference being that investment banking inefficiencies are a problem for the bank management and shareholders, as opposed to taxpayers being forcibly relieved of their money under penalty of imprisonment.
Except it is a drag on everyone else and in 08/09 led to an enormous direct call on public money.
That was Gordon Brown’s fault from the beginning to the end. Many banks should have been allowed to fail, with insured deposits and safe mortgages kept in some sort of a government bank that could have been floated later.
Oh for heaven's sake. Are you for real?
What is the problem with banks failing? If they are not allied to fail, they should not be allowed to make profit. Profit is the reward for risk.
Usually yes. But in 08 the whole system was close to collapse. You can't just let that happen.
Yes you can.
There are procedures in place for banks to continue as going concerns even if insolvent. Insured depositors get protected, uninsured ones don't and take a haircut and bondholders and stockholders do too.
Those procedures could and should have been implemented. As they were in Iceland where the entire system got wiped out but insured depositors were protected just as they should be.
I've changed my mind today. I used to think The Hundred was a rubbish idea but after attending one of the double matches today at Edgbaston I've decided they're fantastic. A brilliant idea from whoever came up with it.
I am sorry we are going to have to you to leave this establishment as you have clearly had one too many to drink.
I expect the two child benefit cap will go in November mostly funded by an increase in gambling taxes . This no 10 will hope will reduce the appeal of Your party .
An increase in gambling taxes is low hanging fruit and won’t be controversial for the vast majority of the public .
Good morning
Another unpopular measure according to the polls, and does nothing to address Reeves 'all my very own deep hole' in the public finances
Why doesn't she focus on all the popular ways to increase taxes and cut spending? It's exasperating.
Truth is that income tax has to rise, but she cannot do that because of her idiotic pre election promises
Also you do not raise taxes to address a huge hole in the public finances and use some of that tax raising to create another spending commitment
Do you think whoever is leading the tory party at the next GE will do into it promising to raise income tax because I don't.
Labour are a high tax high spend government and it is not in their DNA to cut spending
Conservatives are low tax low spending and I would expect a conservative government to reduce corporation tax, encourage wealth creation and abolish IHT on farmers. I would also expect a review of all net zero subsidies
Why on earth would you expect them to do that? Most of that is at odds with their time in office - particularly on renewables and farmers.
Any party that is focussed on a pensioner voting cohort like the Conservatives is going to high tax, high spend.
Cameron and Osborne certainly cut spending as a percentage of gdp and cut tax at all income levels, including a big inheritance tax cut.
Kemi has said she will take an axe to spending, especially welfare spending and net zero spending etc and at one stage even proposed means testing the triple lock
How much did the national debt increase during the last Conservative government?
Because of lockdown, Cameron and Osborne certainly cut it compared to what Brown left
You’d think someone interested in politics would understand the difference between the deficit and the debt but you’ve never been good with numbers.
You did not just say national debt, you said national debt increase, the national debt increase was lower under Cameron and Clegg and Osborne than Brown and Darling
Are you trying to argue that the national debt didn’t increase between 2010 and 2024? Because it did. Massively.
It increased at a lower rate than under Brown and Darling, certainly pre lockdown
And yet the national debt increased. Massively. Strong financial management by the Tories. Bravo.
Spending as a percentage of gdp was 47% when Brown left office in 2010, falling to 41% when Cameron left office in 2016
Maybe, but that isn’t the national debt. That’s a different statistic entirely.
It led to the decline in increase in the national debt
Maybe. But yet the national debt still increased over the 14 years you were in power. Massively.
What additional cuts would you have made to balance the budget and run a surplus?
I'd double council tax. That's the current deficit wiped out (nearly) in one go.
A freeze on hospital spending, abolish stamp duty, NICs/IT merger. Borrow as much for capital investment as the markets allow.
I honestly don't see the point in borrowing for capital investment when the cost of infrastructure is so high. We need to actually work to remove all of those barriers before we even think about that. Again, it just seems absolutely criminal to me that building a third runway at Heathrow will cost £49bn, even the short runway will come in at £21bn. This is just one example, there's suggestions that the next nuclear plant will be £70bn while Korea builds all of this similar infrastructure at a tenth of the cost. It's not as though their living standards are substantially different to ours.
It's not universally bad. We've had some good projects in Scotland. Queensferry Crossing came in under budget and on time. Small stuff, incremental stuff, tends to go ok.
I think you've fallen for the trap of thinking in terms of billions, not millions. The odd town bypass, new tram routes, a few million on cycle lanes, rail electrification, phone masts, a public health investment. That can add up to billions, but you've diversified across projects so that one disaster doesn't cause the whole investment to collapse.
Yes lots of small projects can add up to a decent gain, yet it's the big projects that will move the needle. The problem we have is the government treats it like something like HS2 as a 5x 55 point unrelated tickets instead of an epic with 150x 3 point tickets.
One of my best mates was previously on the project and he was sitting around being paid £650 per day to do nothing because there just wasn't anything for him to do but they'd contracted him from a set date to a set date but that work was so badly delayed that for the whole 3 months of the contract he got paid to be "on call" and then once work finally did commence they had to call him and his crew back at an even higher rate. That's about 25 electricians of varying skill level on day rates because they declined to do the fixed price deal he offered as it was "too restrictive" due to him setting a specific time to start and finish, requiring the site to be handed in a certain way and all materials etc... to be delivered to a tight schedule and completing the project over 4.5 months. In the end it took them 3 months of doing nothing, then another 6 months of actual work and the overall cost was 2.5x what he offered in the fixed price contract.
I have no doubt that this small example isn't the only one where inept public sector project managers and consultants who don't know what they're doing end up pissing public money into the wind because there's zero repercussions.
That’s nuts, and you know that exactly the same scenario would have played out for every single other trade on the project. Thousands of people people each paid hundreds of pounds a day to do nothing productive.
That - on a massive scale - is what I saw and experienced all day every day during my time in 'investment banking'. And not a government or public sector employee in sight.
The difference being that investment banking inefficiencies are a problem for the bank management and shareholders, as opposed to taxpayers being forcibly relieved of their money under penalty of imprisonment.
Except it is a drag on everyone else and in 08/09 led to an enormous direct call on public money.
That was Gordon Brown’s fault from the beginning to the end. Many banks should have been allowed to fail, with insured deposits and safe mortgages kept in some sort of a government bank that could have been floated later.
Oh for heaven's sake. Are you for real?
What is the problem with banks failing? If they are not allied to fail, they should not be allowed to make profit. Profit is the reward for risk.
Usually yes. But in 08 the whole system was close to collapse. You can't just let that happen.
Yes you can.
There are procedures in place for banks to continue as going concerns even if insolvent. Insured depositors get protected, uninsured ones don't and take a haircut and bondholders and stockholders do too.
Those procedures could and should have been implemented. As they were in Iceland where the entire system got wiped out but insured depositors were protected just as they should be.
I expect the two child benefit cap will go in November mostly funded by an increase in gambling taxes . This no 10 will hope will reduce the appeal of Your party .
An increase in gambling taxes is low hanging fruit and won’t be controversial for the vast majority of the public .
Good morning
Another unpopular measure according to the polls, and does nothing to address Reeves 'all my very own deep hole' in the public finances
Why doesn't she focus on all the popular ways to increase taxes and cut spending? It's exasperating.
Truth is that income tax has to rise, but she cannot do that because of her idiotic pre election promises
Also you do not raise taxes to address a huge hole in the public finances and use some of that tax raising to create another spending commitment
Do you think whoever is leading the tory party at the next GE will do into it promising to raise income tax because I don't.
Labour are a high tax high spend government and it is not in their DNA to cut spending
Conservatives are low tax low spending and I would expect a conservative government to reduce corporation tax, encourage wealth creation and abolish IHT on farmers. I would also expect a review of all net zero subsidies
Why on earth would you expect them to do that? Most of that is at odds with their time in office - particularly on renewables and farmers.
Any party that is focussed on a pensioner voting cohort like the Conservatives is going to high tax, high spend.
Cameron and Osborne certainly cut spending as a percentage of gdp and cut tax at all income levels, including a big inheritance tax cut.
Kemi has said she will take an axe to spending, especially welfare spending and net zero spending etc and at one stage even proposed means testing the triple lock
How much did the national debt increase during the last Conservative government?
Because of lockdown, Cameron and Osborne certainly cut it compared to what Brown left
You’d think someone interested in politics would understand the difference between the deficit and the debt but you’ve never been good with numbers.
You did not just say national debt, you said national debt increase, the national debt increase was lower under Cameron and Clegg and Osborne than Brown and Darling
Are you trying to argue that the national debt didn’t increase between 2010 and 2024? Because it did. Massively.
It increased at a lower rate than under Brown and Darling, certainly pre lockdown
And yet the national debt increased. Massively. Strong financial management by the Tories. Bravo.
Spending as a percentage of gdp was 47% when Brown left office in 2010, falling to 41% when Cameron left office in 2016
Maybe, but that isn’t the national debt. That’s a different statistic entirely.
It led to the decline in increase in the national debt
Maybe. But yet the national debt still increased over the 14 years you were in power. Massively.
What additional cuts would you have made to balance the budget and run a surplus?
I'd double council tax. That's the current deficit wiped out (nearly) in one go.
A freeze on hospital spending, abolish stamp duty, NICs/IT merger. Borrow as much for capital investment as the markets allow.
I honestly don't see the point in borrowing for capital investment when the cost of infrastructure is so high. We need to actually work to remove all of those barriers before we even think about that. Again, it just seems absolutely criminal to me that building a third runway at Heathrow will cost £49bn, even the short runway will come in at £21bn. This is just one example, there's suggestions that the next nuclear plant will be £70bn while Korea builds all of this similar infrastructure at a tenth of the cost. It's not as though their living standards are substantially different to ours.
It's not universally bad. We've had some good projects in Scotland. Queensferry Crossing came in under budget and on time. Small stuff, incremental stuff, tends to go ok.
I think you've fallen for the trap of thinking in terms of billions, not millions. The odd town bypass, new tram routes, a few million on cycle lanes, rail electrification, phone masts, a public health investment. That can add up to billions, but you've diversified across projects so that one disaster doesn't cause the whole investment to collapse.
Yes lots of small projects can add up to a decent gain, yet it's the big projects that will move the needle. The problem we have is the government treats it like something like HS2 as a 5x 55 point unrelated tickets instead of an epic with 150x 3 point tickets.
One of my best mates was previously on the project and he was sitting around being paid £650 per day to do nothing because there just wasn't anything for him to do but they'd contracted him from a set date to a set date but that work was so badly delayed that for the whole 3 months of the contract he got paid to be "on call" and then once work finally did commence they had to call him and his crew back at an even higher rate. That's about 25 electricians of varying skill level on day rates because they declined to do the fixed price deal he offered as it was "too restrictive" due to him setting a specific time to start and finish, requiring the site to be handed in a certain way and all materials etc... to be delivered to a tight schedule and completing the project over 4.5 months. In the end it took them 3 months of doing nothing, then another 6 months of actual work and the overall cost was 2.5x what he offered in the fixed price contract.
I have no doubt that this small example isn't the only one where inept public sector project managers and consultants who don't know what they're doing end up pissing public money into the wind because there's zero repercussions.
That’s nuts, and you know that exactly the same scenario would have played out for every single other trade on the project. Thousands of people people each paid hundreds of pounds a day to do nothing productive.
That - on a massive scale - is what I saw and experienced all day every day during my time in 'investment banking'. And not a government or public sector employee in sight.
The difference being that investment banking inefficiencies are a problem for the bank management and shareholders, as opposed to taxpayers being forcibly relieved of their money under penalty of imprisonment.
Except it is a drag on everyone else and in 08/09 led to an enormous direct call on public money.
That was Gordon Brown’s fault from the beginning to the end. Many banks should have been allowed to fail, with insured deposits and safe mortgages kept in some sort of a government bank that could have been floated later.
Oh for heaven's sake. Are you for real?
What is the problem with banks failing? If they are not allied to fail, they should not be allowed to make profit. Profit is the reward for risk.
Usually yes. But in 08 the whole system was close to collapse. You can't just let that happen.
I totally agree . The RBS was hours from total collapse . Lehmans was an investment bank as opposed to a commercial bank and that makes a huge difference in terms of impact on the general public .
I expect the two child benefit cap will go in November mostly funded by an increase in gambling taxes . This no 10 will hope will reduce the appeal of Your party .
An increase in gambling taxes is low hanging fruit and won’t be controversial for the vast majority of the public .
Good morning
Another unpopular measure according to the polls, and does nothing to address Reeves 'all my very own deep hole' in the public finances
Why doesn't she focus on all the popular ways to increase taxes and cut spending? It's exasperating.
Truth is that income tax has to rise, but she cannot do that because of her idiotic pre election promises
Also you do not raise taxes to address a huge hole in the public finances and use some of that tax raising to create another spending commitment
Do you think whoever is leading the tory party at the next GE will do into it promising to raise income tax because I don't.
Labour are a high tax high spend government and it is not in their DNA to cut spending
Conservatives are low tax low spending and I would expect a conservative government to reduce corporation tax, encourage wealth creation and abolish IHT on farmers. I would also expect a review of all net zero subsidies
Why on earth would you expect them to do that? Most of that is at odds with their time in office - particularly on renewables and farmers.
Any party that is focussed on a pensioner voting cohort like the Conservatives is going to high tax, high spend.
Cameron and Osborne certainly cut spending as a percentage of gdp and cut tax at all income levels, including a big inheritance tax cut.
Kemi has said she will take an axe to spending, especially welfare spending and net zero spending etc and at one stage even proposed means testing the triple lock
How much did the national debt increase during the last Conservative government?
Because of lockdown, Cameron and Osborne certainly cut it compared to what Brown left
You’d think someone interested in politics would understand the difference between the deficit and the debt but you’ve never been good with numbers.
You did not just say national debt, you said national debt increase, the national debt increase was lower under Cameron and Clegg and Osborne than Brown and Darling
Are you trying to argue that the national debt didn’t increase between 2010 and 2024? Because it did. Massively.
It increased at a lower rate than under Brown and Darling, certainly pre lockdown
And yet the national debt increased. Massively. Strong financial management by the Tories. Bravo.
Spending as a percentage of gdp was 47% when Brown left office in 2010, falling to 41% when Cameron left office in 2016
Maybe, but that isn’t the national debt. That’s a different statistic entirely.
It led to the decline in increase in the national debt
Maybe. But yet the national debt still increased over the 14 years you were in power. Massively.
What additional cuts would you have made to balance the budget and run a surplus?
I'd double council tax. That's the current deficit wiped out (nearly) in one go.
A freeze on hospital spending, abolish stamp duty, NICs/IT merger. Borrow as much for capital investment as the markets allow.
I honestly don't see the point in borrowing for capital investment when the cost of infrastructure is so high. We need to actually work to remove all of those barriers before we even think about that. Again, it just seems absolutely criminal to me that building a third runway at Heathrow will cost £49bn, even the short runway will come in at £21bn. This is just one example, there's suggestions that the next nuclear plant will be £70bn while Korea builds all of this similar infrastructure at a tenth of the cost. It's not as though their living standards are substantially different to ours.
It's not universally bad. We've had some good projects in Scotland. Queensferry Crossing came in under budget and on time. Small stuff, incremental stuff, tends to go ok.
I think you've fallen for the trap of thinking in terms of billions, not millions. The odd town bypass, new tram routes, a few million on cycle lanes, rail electrification, phone masts, a public health investment. That can add up to billions, but you've diversified across projects so that one disaster doesn't cause the whole investment to collapse.
Yes lots of small projects can add up to a decent gain, yet it's the big projects that will move the needle. The problem we have is the government treats it like something like HS2 as a 5x 55 point unrelated tickets instead of an epic with 150x 3 point tickets.
One of my best mates was previously on the project and he was sitting around being paid £650 per day to do nothing because there just wasn't anything for him to do but they'd contracted him from a set date to a set date but that work was so badly delayed that for the whole 3 months of the contract he got paid to be "on call" and then once work finally did commence they had to call him and his crew back at an even higher rate. That's about 25 electricians of varying skill level on day rates because they declined to do the fixed price deal he offered as it was "too restrictive" due to him setting a specific time to start and finish, requiring the site to be handed in a certain way and all materials etc... to be delivered to a tight schedule and completing the project over 4.5 months. In the end it took them 3 months of doing nothing, then another 6 months of actual work and the overall cost was 2.5x what he offered in the fixed price contract.
I have no doubt that this small example isn't the only one where inept public sector project managers and consultants who don't know what they're doing end up pissing public money into the wind because there's zero repercussions.
That’s nuts, and you know that exactly the same scenario would have played out for every single other trade on the project. Thousands of people people each paid hundreds of pounds a day to do nothing productive.
That - on a massive scale - is what I saw and experienced all day every day during my time in 'investment banking'. And not a government or public sector employee in sight.
The difference being that investment banking inefficiencies are a problem for the bank management and shareholders, as opposed to taxpayers being forcibly relieved of their money under penalty of imprisonment.
Except it is a drag on everyone else and in 08/09 led to an enormous direct call on public money.
That was Gordon Brown’s fault from the beginning to the end. Many banks should have been allowed to fail, with insured deposits and safe mortgages kept in some sort of a government bank that could have been floated later.
Oh for heaven's sake. Are you for real?
What is the problem with banks failing? If they are not allied to fail, they should not be allowed to make profit. Profit is the reward for risk.
Usually yes. But in 08 the whole system was close to collapse. You can't just let that happen.
I totally agree . The RBS was hours from total collapse . Lehmans was an investment bank as opposed to a commercial bank and that makes a huge difference in terms of impact on the general public .
In which case, a rescue should be done that involves the shareholders being wiped out and the executives fired for gross misconduct
Seeing reports that Trump will meet Putin in Alaska on August 15th... Hopefully he's not planning on trying to recreate the Alaska purchase but with Ukraine?
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The alternative is to keep the war going and apply sanctions until Russian military collapse.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The alternative is to keep the war going and apply sanctions until Russian military collapse.
With many more deaths in the process and no sign of any imminent Russian military collapse despite years of sanctions
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
Actually, I was being generous. Ukraine is expected to give up further territory, which will make the from less defensible against the next invasion.
So the deal, according to Bloomberg, is all of Donetsk and Lugansk regions to Ru in exchange for a Russian promise not to advance to Kherson and Zaporizhia and a full freeze. Plus some kind of a US/Ru memo on future relations between Ru and the West, plus some sanctions relief. https://x.com/vfroloff/status/1953835107497738545
So, effectively, a pause in the fighting, along with sanctions relief, that allows Russia to rearm in conditions favourable for SMO2.
Trump will, of course, veto any suggestion of NATO membership, as will Putin, who has been granted a de facto veto.
A couple of points: 1. Eastern Ukraine is not Trump’s to bargain away. 2. This 1-on-1 meeting is already a huge win for Putin. By sidelining Zelenskyy, Putin has reinforced his narrative about the illegitimacy of #Ukraine as a sovereign state. https://x.com/WarintheFuture/status/1953944794272870828
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
Without NATO membership and with weak, meaningless security guarantees, this path risks killing our country.
Russia will not abandon its imperial ambitions. With the Damocles sword of another invasion hanging over us, the investment needed to rebuild will never come. People won’t return and those still here will think twice about whether they can afford to stay in a country with broken infrastructure, no workplaces due to lack of investment, and the looming threat of another devastating invasion. https://x.com/BohuslavskaKate/status/1953840002808360966
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
It can't, if Europe refuse to be forced.
But if Trump halts arms supplies, Europe will find it quite hard, for the next year or so at least, to make up the deficit.
Europe has a choice to make. I know how I would choose, but the problem is that public opinion is not fully united on this.
Even the UK isn't - as HYUFD's comments seem to suggest.
Bottom line, Trump meeting Putin in Alaska to agree a carve up of Ukraine, without any prior consultation with either Ukraine or Europe, is a huge betrayal of both.
FPT. "This is no criticism of YouGov but more a coment on the irrelevance of Kemi Badenoch as YouGov didn’t feel the need to poll these questions about Kemi Badenoch."
Genuine question TSE, why no criticism of YouGov for failing to acknowledge Kemi Badenoch as the leader of the main Opposition party at Westminster in this poll and then giving them a free pass for doing so and writing off her absence from it as more a comment of the 'irrevelavance' her as a politician when the same poll included a former Labour party leader now an independent backbencher who has just formed a new party with less than a handful of MPs and about 6 elected councillors to its name?
From the moment I read your article setting out YouGov's findings as a female poster on this site I felt really uncomfortable and to be honest, bloody angry! And I know I am probable going to be very unpopular for pointing this out, but the silence from any of the regulars on the site questioning this arrogant assumption about a woman who did something that neither Farage or Corbyn have done recently, and that is fought a leadership contest and won and she is the politican that faces the PM on a weekly basis at PMQs!
But as another regular poster admitted yesterday on this site these days it really can come across as a mens only club. I was a regular poster on the site from almost the beginning when Mike Smithson set it up, I still remember the day I went from a lurker to a poster only to be welcomed by a very elderly Jacobite who when informed me that as a Scottish Conservative I was most welcome because we don't have many of them here. Back in the early days I was ChrisD until someone one night got annoyed about the sheer amount of Chris's on the site and I then changed my name to ChristinaD only to discover that despite being a 40 year old married Mum of three more than one regular had assumed I was a single gay man because not only I did I not share personal details back then it was almost a given I had to male.
But over the next few years we finally built up a very formidable but small regular female presence on the site, and yes lads, we formed a bit of a collective and talked off piste. But the biggest irony for me is that I became good friends on here with the then only female SNP supporter on the site despite our political differences. And I am genuinely really sad today at the lack of openly female voices on here since my return to posting, even more sad now with the absence of the last really fiesty female voice on the site in Cyclefree who has done so much heavy lifting on her own as a regular contributor in recent years.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The alternative is to keep the war going and apply sanctions until Russian military collapse.
With many more deaths in the process and no sign of any imminent Russian military collapse despite years of sanctions
Putin doesn't want peace. A ceasefire allowing Russia to rearm and rebuild its economy will just lead to a wider war in a few years.
FPT. "This is no criticism of YouGov but more a coment on the irrelevance of Kemi Badenoch as YouGov didn’t feel the need to poll these questions about Kemi Badenoch."
Genuine question TSE, why no criticism of YouGov for failing to acknowledge Kemi Badenoch as the leader of the main Opposition party at Westminster in this poll and then giving them a free pass for doing so and writing off her absence from it as more a comment of the 'irrevelavance' her as a politician when the same poll included a former Labour party leader now an independent backbencher who has just formed a new party with less than a handful of MPs and about 6 elected councillors to its name?
From the moment I read your article setting out YouGov's findings as a female poster on this site I felt really uncomfortable and to be honest, bloody angry! And I know I am probable going to be very unpopular for pointing this out, but the silence from any of the regulars on the site questioning this arrogant assumption about a woman who did something that neither Farage or Corbyn have done recently, and that is fought a leadership contest and won and she is the politican that faces the PM on a weekly basis at PMQs!
But as another regular poster admitted yesterday on this site these days it really can come across as a mens only club. I was a regular poster on the site from almost the beginning when Mike Smithson set it up, I still remember the day I went from a lurker to a poster only to be welcomed by a very elderly Jacobite who when informed me that as a Scottish Conservative I was most welcome because we don't have many of them here. Back in the early days I was ChrisD until someone one night got annoyed about the sheer amount of Chris's on the site and I then changed my name to ChristinaD only to discover that despite being a 40 year old married Mum of three more than one regular had assumed I was a single gay man because not only I did I not share personal details back then it was almost a given I had to male.
But over the next few years we finally built up a very formidable but small regular female presence on the site, and yes lads, we formed a bit of a collective and talked off piste. But the biggest irony for me is that I became good friends on here with the then only female SNP supporter on the site despite our political differences. And I am genuinely really sad today at the lack of openly female voices on here since my return to posting, even more sad now with the absence of the last really fiesty female voice on the site in Cyclefree who has done so much heavy lifting on her own as a regular contributor in recent years.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
The problem is that European diplomats (and I include Mandelson in this) think Trump is just another leader to be bargained with.
This fundamentally misunderstands Trump. There is no bargain to which Trump (or Putin come to mention it) will keep. Agreeing a deal lasts only as long as Trump or Putin finds it convenient to abide by a deal.
The correct thing to do is to tell Putin and Trump to fuck off, and to then throw everything we have behind Ukraine.
But that requires courage that our leaders lack. The path of least resistance is -sadly- a path that leads to ever more misery and death.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
The problem is that European diplomats (and I include Mandelson in this) think Trump is just another leader to be bargained with.
This fundamentally misunderstands Trump. There is no bargain to which Trump (or Putin come to mention it) will keep. Agreeing a deal lasts only as long as Trump or Putin finds it convenient to abide by a deal.
The correct thing to do is to tell Putin and Trump to fuck off, and to then throw everything we have behind Ukraine.
But that requires courage that our leaders lack. The path of least resistance is -sadly- a path that leads to ever more misery and death.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
Trump will put sanctions on us.
Nothing must be allowed to get in the way of his Nobel peace prize.
Putin's MO is conquer and divide the spoils like some medieval king. At the recent meeting between Witkoff and Putin, the Russian Inward Investment minister was there. It appears Putin will simply bribe the US and all the Trump backers to get what he wants. He knows Trump's weaknesses as well as those around Trump.
A Russian company associated with a prominent Kremlin-linked oligarch recently bought and privatized the occupied Port of Yalta in Crimea, supporting Kremlin efforts to award loyalists with a stake in Russia’s occupation project. The Crimean Tatar Resource Center (CTRC) reported on August 4 that the Russian occupation administration “privatized” the Port of Yalta in occupied Yalta, Crimea. Kremlin newswire TASS previously reported on August 1 that the Moscow-based Chernomorskoye Razvitie holding company won the auction for the sale of the port.[16] CTRC noted that Chernomorskoye Razvitie was the sole bidder at auction.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
The problem is that European diplomats (and I include Mandelson in this) think Trump is just another leader to be bargained with.
This fundamentally misunderstands Trump. There is no bargain to which Trump (or Putin come to mention it) will keep. Agreeing a deal lasts only as long as Trump or Putin finds it convenient to abide by a deal.
The correct thing to do is to tell Putin and Trump to fuck off, and to then throw everything we have behind Ukraine.
But that requires courage that our leaders lack. The path of least resistance is -sadly- a path that leads to ever more misery and death.
You give Mandelson too much credit. He will want what gives him the most back; remember, this is the man who got thrown out of government twice. Mandelson was, and is, a terrible appointment at this time.
It's possible that this 'ceasefire' will lead to a wider, hotter war in the medium term. Indeed, it's almost certain. It's also probable that this 'ceasefire' is designed to take attention away from Trump and Epstein.
So it's possible that Epstein's evil will lead to a hot war in Europe.
Putin's MO is conquer and divide the spoils like some medieval king. At the recent meeting between Witkoff and Putin, the Russian Inward Investment minister was there. It appears Putin will simply bribe the US and all the Trump backers to get what he wants. He knows Trump's weaknesses as well as those around Trump.
A Russian company associated with a prominent Kremlin-linked oligarch recently bought and privatized the occupied Port of Yalta in Crimea, supporting Kremlin efforts to award loyalists with a stake in Russia’s occupation project. The Crimean Tatar Resource Center (CTRC) reported on August 4 that the Russian occupation administration “privatized” the Port of Yalta in occupied Yalta, Crimea. Kremlin newswire TASS previously reported on August 1 that the Moscow-based Chernomorskoye Razvitie holding company won the auction for the sale of the port.[16] CTRC noted that Chernomorskoye Razvitie was the sole bidder at auction.
Trump is bribeable, it really is a simple as that. We saw it with the Qatari jet. Putin will give him some bold-plated tat and Trump will then agree to anything.
I think it evidence of Trump's decline into senility. His existing personality becomes more rigid, his attention span fades and his desires become more base. Theres no other reason to feather his nest so enthusiastically. He doesn't need money where he is going.
If Vladimir Putin truly wanted peace, he would never have invaded Ukraine.
He’s a follower of Tacitus
Good morning, everyone.
Wasn't Tacitus being critical when he wrote of creating a desert/devastation/waste and calling it peace?
Although Trump as the barbaric Scotsman babbling nonsense in a language he doesn't understand written by somebody he doesn't know before losing a battle due to incompetence doesn't sound like a bad metaphor...
Putin's MO is conquer and divide the spoils like some medieval king. At the recent meeting between Witkoff and Putin, the Russian Inward Investment minister was there. It appears Putin will simply bribe the US and all the Trump backers to get what he wants. He knows Trump's weaknesses as well as those around Trump.
A Russian company associated with a prominent Kremlin-linked oligarch recently bought and privatized the occupied Port of Yalta in Crimea, supporting Kremlin efforts to award loyalists with a stake in Russia’s occupation project. The Crimean Tatar Resource Center (CTRC) reported on August 4 that the Russian occupation administration “privatized” the Port of Yalta in occupied Yalta, Crimea. Kremlin newswire TASS previously reported on August 1 that the Moscow-based Chernomorskoye Razvitie holding company won the auction for the sale of the port.[16] CTRC noted that Chernomorskoye Razvitie was the sole bidder at auction.
Trump is bribeable, it really is a simple as that. We saw it with the Qatari jet. Putin will give him some bold-plated tat and Trump will then agree to anything.
I think it evidence of Trump's decline into senility. His existing personality becomes more rigid, his attention span fades and his desires become more base. Theres no other reason to feather his nest so enthusiastically. He doesn't need money where he is going.
Just as a matter of interest, how did Rome do after the senile emperors?
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
Putin's MO is conquer and divide the spoils like some medieval king. At the recent meeting between Witkoff and Putin, the Russian Inward Investment minister was there. It appears Putin will simply bribe the US and all the Trump backers to get what he wants. He knows Trump's weaknesses as well as those around Trump.
A Russian company associated with a prominent Kremlin-linked oligarch recently bought and privatized the occupied Port of Yalta in Crimea, supporting Kremlin efforts to award loyalists with a stake in Russia’s occupation project. The Crimean Tatar Resource Center (CTRC) reported on August 4 that the Russian occupation administration “privatized” the Port of Yalta in occupied Yalta, Crimea. Kremlin newswire TASS previously reported on August 1 that the Moscow-based Chernomorskoye Razvitie holding company won the auction for the sale of the port.[16] CTRC noted that Chernomorskoye Razvitie was the sole bidder at auction.
Trump is bribeable, it really is a simple as that. We saw it with the Qatari jet. Putin will give him some bold-plated tat and Trump will then agree to anything.
I think it evidence of Trump's decline into senility. His existing personality becomes more rigid, his attention span fades and his desires become more base. Theres no other reason to feather his nest so enthusiastically. He doesn't need money where he is going.
Just as a matter of interest, how did Rome do after the senile emperors?
He reminds me more of the Presidents of the Third Republic. Especially the one who dutifully turned up for an important civic meeting wearing his decorations, as instructed, but having unfortunately omitted to put his clothes on first.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
If you think (*) Ukraine is a failed state, then surely you think Russia is also a 'failed' state?
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
Hmmm: like me, you've been to that part of the world. Would you really describe it as more failed than -say- Belorus?
And you have to admit that the ex-Soviet states that got into bed with the West have done rather better than those that stayed in the Russian orbit, no?
Putin's MO is conquer and divide the spoils like some medieval king. At the recent meeting between Witkoff and Putin, the Russian Inward Investment minister was there. It appears Putin will simply bribe the US and all the Trump backers to get what he wants. He knows Trump's weaknesses as well as those around Trump.
A Russian company associated with a prominent Kremlin-linked oligarch recently bought and privatized the occupied Port of Yalta in Crimea, supporting Kremlin efforts to award loyalists with a stake in Russia’s occupation project. The Crimean Tatar Resource Center (CTRC) reported on August 4 that the Russian occupation administration “privatized” the Port of Yalta in occupied Yalta, Crimea. Kremlin newswire TASS previously reported on August 1 that the Moscow-based Chernomorskoye Razvitie holding company won the auction for the sale of the port.[16] CTRC noted that Chernomorskoye Razvitie was the sole bidder at auction.
Trump is bribeable, it really is a simple as that. We saw it with the Qatari jet. Putin will give him some bold-plated tat and Trump will then agree to anything.
I think it evidence of Trump's decline into senility. His existing personality becomes more rigid, his attention span fades and his desires become more base. Theres no other reason to feather his nest so enthusiastically. He doesn't need money where he is going.
Just as a matter of interest, how did Rome do after the senile emperors?
Weak emperors were dominated by military strongmen, increasingly barbarians. Ricimer was one of the worst, as he betrayed, tortured, and slew Majorian, the last emperor with the competence and morals to try and restore the empire. Later, the last strongman Odoacer simply removed the role of western emperor and ruled directly, but in the east the Empire recovered and lasted a thousand years more.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
Quite impressive writing so much crap in such a short post.
You really should learn something about that part of the world. And about Trump for that matter - he expects everybody else to do him favours, but rarely if ever returns them.
Ukraine isn't a failed state at all - it has a functioning government, a democratic opposition, a reasonably free press and a heroic President.
It isn't "entirely dependent" on its "parasitical relationship" with EU and UK taxpayers at all - of Ukraine's state budget of $74 billion, only about $11 billion comes from international grants, and much of that was from the interest on frozen Russian assets, not European taxpayers.
If anybody is the parasite, it's us - giving pitifully inadequate aid while a brave democracy holds back an evil and aggressive dictatorship at enormous cost in money and men.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
Hmmm: like me, you've been to that part of the world. Would you really describe it as more failed than -say- Belorus?
And you have to admit that the ex-Soviet states that got into bed with the West have done rather better than those that stayed in the Russian orbit, no?
I've never lived in Belarus but have visited many times. I did live in Kiev in the mid-noughties. Ukraine was poorer, more corrupt and had far more crime then but Belarus was way more totalitarian. Just differing shades of fucked up. Ukraine is now definitely more failed than Belarus (and the Russian Federation). The post 1990 configuration of Ukraine was just never going to be politically sustainable as events have proved.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
Hmmm: like me, you've been to that part of the world. Would you really describe it as more failed than -say- Belorus?
And you have to admit that the ex-Soviet states that got into bed with the West have done rather better than those that stayed in the Russian orbit, no?
I've never lived in Belarus but have visited many times. I did live in Kiev in the mid-noughties. Ukraine was poorer, more corrupt and had far more crime then but Belarus was way more totalitarian. Just differing shades of fucked up. Ukraine is now definitely more failed than Belarus (and the Russian Federation). The post 1990 configuration of Ukraine was just never going to be politically sustainable as events have proved.
LOL. No.
Do you see the post-1990 configuration of the Baltic states to be 'politically sustainable' ?
(Where I think you mean 'political sustainable' to mean Putin won't stand for it...)
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
Quite impressive writing so much crap in such a short post.
You really should learn something about that part of the world. And about Trump for that matter - he expects everybody else to do him favours, but rarely if ever returns them.
Ukraine isn't a failed state at all - it has a functioning government, a democratic opposition, a reasonably free press and a heroic President.
It isn't "entirely dependent" on its "parasitical relationship" with EU and UK taxpayers at all - of Ukraine's state budget of $74 billion, only about $11 billion comes from international grants, and much of that was from the interest on frozen Russian assets, not European taxpayers.
If anybody is the parasite, it's us - giving pitifully inadequate aid while a brave democracy holds back an evil and aggressive dictatorship at enormous cost in money and men.
I fear that @Dura_Ace 's idea of a 'failed state' in that part of the world is one that is not under Russia's influence. Democracy does not matter to him; corruption does not matter. All that matters is Mother Russia.
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
Hmmm: like me, you've been to that part of the world. Would you really describe it as more failed than -say- Belorus?
And you have to admit that the ex-Soviet states that got into bed with the West have done rather better than those that stayed in the Russian orbit, no?
I've never lived in Belarus but have visited many times. I did live in Kiev in the mid-noughties. Ukraine was poorer, more corrupt and had far more crime then but Belarus was way more totalitarian. Just differing shades of fucked up. Ukraine is now definitely more failed than Belarus (and the Russian Federation). The post 1990 configuration of Ukraine was just never going to be politically sustainable as events have proved.
Ukraine itself is an entirely viable State. Its problem is that the Russian elite see it as the jewel in the crown of the Russian empire. The percentage of its population that actually wishes to be a part of that empire is in single digits.
A failed state is one that is incapable of governing itself, rather than one that it is under foreign attack.
Edgy female comic blames Oasis for no one turning up to her gig, tickets were free, on the Tuesday. The Oasis gig was on the Friday. She also had to cancel her kids gig as no one turned up, again free tickets.
Edgy female comic blames Oasis for no one turning up to her gig, tickets were free, on the Tuesday. The Oasis gig was on the Friday. She also had to cancel her kids gig as no one turned up, again free tickets.
Edgy female comic blames Oasis for no one turning up to her gig, tickets were free, on the Tuesday. The Oasis gig was on the Friday. She also had to cancel her kids gig as no one turned up, again free tickets.
There is not going to be much humour in a "left wing, anti men, feminist, terf hating atheist, polyamorous comedian, activist." A free ticket would leave me feeling short-changed.
Morning all! I think The Conservative Party has gone mad.
Keni believes that she has to tack hard right to see off Jenrick / to compete with Reform. On TwiX they are posting some extraordinary stuff about deporting people.
Every single response pointing- and I do mean every single one - attacks them and points out they had 14 years and did nothing.
They think “let’s go hardline and we’ll be relevant to racists”. But all they have done is remind people that it’s their fault.
Suddenly the polls reducing them to 29 seats make sense…
Zelensky has spoken, and like Madam Butterfly, he not happy.
It's unclear why anyone would give up territory that the other side has failed to conquer.
Territory swaps is interesting language, implying Russia gives up land somewhere. I don't believe it myself.
Ukraine is an imperfect state, with corruption and a number of other issues, but it's biggest problem is it's neighbour.
The suggestion is they give up the bits two of the oblasts they have conquered - Zaporizhia and Kherson - in exchange for all of Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea.
Which would mean they are given Ukraine their own land back in exchange for taking more of it.
If this is Donald Trump's idea of making deals, no wonder he kept going bust. Even Keir Starmer can negotiate better than that.
Edgy female comic blames Oasis for no one turning up to her gig, tickets were free, on the Tuesday. The Oasis gig was on the Friday. She also had to cancel her kids gig as no one turned up, again free tickets.
There is not going to be much humour in a "left wing, anti men, feminist, terf hating atheist, polyamorous comedian, activist." A free ticket would leave me feeling short-changed.
You don't need any qualifications to be a comedian; you don't get a certificate before you can book a struggling venue and try to get the punters in. So anyone can call themselves a comedian. Indeed, some people are comedians unintentionally.
But comedy, and humour, is in the eye of the beholder. I tried watching Mrs Brown's Boys and found it awful; neither Mrs J nor myself found The Office in any way funny. But we both loved Two Pints and League of Gentlemen.
I daresay her brand of comedy might not be to your tastes; but others may enjoy it. And there's also the possibility that the description is part of the act.
Zelensky has spoken, and like Madam Butterfly, he not happy.
It's unclear why anyone would give up territory that the other side has failed to conquer.
Territory swaps is interesting language, implying Russia gives up land somewhere. I don't believe it myself.
Ukraine is an imperfect state, with corruption and a number of other issues, but it's biggest problem is it's neighbour.
Since the Trump-Putin 69 is taking place in Alaska, perhaps the Metternich of Pennsylvania Av is proposing a return of the 49th state in exchange for Putin vacating the occupied territory in Ukraine?
Morning all! I think The Conservative Party has gone mad.
Keni believes that she has to tack hard right to see off Jenrick / to compete with Reform. On TwiX they are posting some extraordinary stuff about deporting people.
Every single response pointing- and I do mean every single one - attacks them and points out they had 14 years and did nothing.
They think “let’s go hardline and we’ll be relevant to racists”. But all they have done is remind people that it’s their fault.
Suddenly the polls reducing them to 29 seats make sense…
She's gone by this time next year so the 2028/9 strategy will then depend on whether they have elected Jenrick, Cleverly or maybe gone f* it and plumped for a wildcard like Lam.
I suppose someone has long ago reflected that perhaps the question is more, what is it about the experience of cheating/being cheated that turns people into Green/Reform sympathisers.
Morning all! I think The Conservative Party has gone mad.
Keni believes that she has to tack hard right to see off Jenrick / to compete with Reform. On TwiX they are posting some extraordinary stuff about deporting people.
Every single response pointing- and I do mean every single one - attacks them and points out they had 14 years and did nothing.
They think “let’s go hardline and we’ll be relevant to racists”. But all they have done is remind people that it’s their fault.
Suddenly the polls reducing them to 29 seats make sense…
Why would posts attacking them for doing nothing (which are true) be a good reason for them not to have a policy of now doing something?
Edgy female comic blames Oasis for no one turning up to her gig, tickets were free, on the Tuesday. The Oasis gig was on the Friday. She also had to cancel her kids gig as no one turned up, again free tickets.
There is not going to be much humour in a "left wing, anti men, feminist, terf hating atheist, polyamorous comedian, activist." A free ticket would leave me feeling short-changed.
Oh come come come, would you not rather listen to that than by anally violated by Mike Tyson?
I suppose someone has long ago reflected that perhaps the question is more, what is it about the experience of cheating/being cheated that turns people into Green/Reform sympathisers.
Good morning, everyone.
Or more pertinently, given the stats, what is it that attracts Reform/Green voters to serial cheaters?
@WSJ Breaking: Russian President Vladimir Putin told the U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for Eastern Ukraine
Trump claims “President Putin I believe wants to see peace” and acknowledges Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions (unclear what Russia’s concessions will be, if any) https://x.com/atrupar/status/1953915459708842361
There's the problem, right there.
As was posted on the previous thread, the US is looking for a ceasefire on current lines ie Russia keeps the territory it now occupies but no more.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
The deal is that Russia gets to keep stolen territory, sanctions relief from the US, and a pause in the fighting. And absolving of responsibility for a war of aggression, and mass murder of civilians.
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now. But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
How does the US force Europe and Ukraine to accept?
He can bring the UK to heel easily enough by threatening Trident. Probably tariffs for the EU.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
If you think (*) Ukraine is a failed state, then surely you think Russia is also a 'failed' state?
(*) Wrongly IMO
Russia is delusional: it doesn't know how failed a state it is.
Comments
There are procedures in place for banks to continue as going concerns even if insolvent. Insured depositors get protected, uninsured ones don't and take a haircut and bondholders and stockholders do too.
Those procedures could and should have been implemented. As they were in Iceland where the entire system got wiped out but insured depositors were protected just as they should be.
Realistically there is no alternative to the above if you want Putin to accept a ceasefire and if Zelensky has not already pushed the Russians back from there he likely never will
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2025
Labour also benefited from the split on the right, it is possible the Tories could win back some voters lost to Reform since 2024
https://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen
Ukraine gets a pause in the fighting, and a promise from Putin - which is of (many times demonstrated) zero value.
And Ukraine and Europe get to prepare for the next invasion, without US help.
If Trump has indeed sold out Europe in this manner, there may be no alternative for now.
But please don't pretend that it's any kind of deal which includes Ukraine. Or Europe.
Ukraine is expected to give up further territory, which will make the from less defensible against the next invasion.
So the deal, according to Bloomberg, is all of Donetsk and Lugansk regions to Ru in exchange for a Russian promise not to advance to Kherson and Zaporizhia and a full freeze. Plus some kind of a US/Ru memo on future relations between Ru and the West, plus some sanctions relief.
https://x.com/vfroloff/status/1953835107497738545
So, effectively, a pause in the fighting, along with sanctions relief, that allows Russia to rearm in conditions favourable for SMO2.
Trump will, of course, veto any suggestion of NATO membership, as will Putin, who has been granted a de facto veto.
1. Eastern Ukraine is not Trump’s to bargain away.
2. This 1-on-1 meeting is already a huge win for Putin. By sidelining Zelenskyy, Putin has reinforced his narrative about the illegitimacy of #Ukraine as a sovereign state.
https://x.com/WarintheFuture/status/1953944794272870828
Russia will not abandon its imperial ambitions. With the Damocles sword of another invasion hanging over us, the investment needed to rebuild will never come. People won’t return and those still here will think twice about whether they can afford to stay in a country with broken infrastructure, no workplaces due to lack of investment, and the looming threat of another devastating invasion.
https://x.com/BohuslavskaKate/status/1953840002808360966
But if Trump halts arms supplies, Europe will find it quite hard, for the next year or so at least, to make up the deficit.
Europe has a choice to make.
I know how I would choose, but the problem is that public opinion is not fully united on this.
Even the UK isn't - as HYUFD's comments seem to suggest.
Genuine question TSE, why no criticism of YouGov for failing to acknowledge Kemi Badenoch as the leader of the main Opposition party at Westminster in this poll and then giving them a free pass for doing so and writing off her absence from it as more a comment of the 'irrevelavance' her as a politician when the same poll included a former Labour party leader now an independent backbencher who has just formed a new party with less than a handful of MPs and about 6 elected councillors to its name?
From the moment I read your article setting out YouGov's findings as a female poster on this site I felt really uncomfortable and to be honest, bloody angry! And I know I am probable going to be very unpopular for pointing this out, but the silence from any of the regulars on the site questioning this arrogant assumption about a woman who did something that neither Farage or Corbyn have done recently, and that is fought a leadership contest and won and she is the politican that faces the PM on a weekly basis at PMQs!
But as another regular poster admitted yesterday on this site these days it really can come across as a mens only club. I was a regular poster on the site from almost the beginning when Mike Smithson set it up, I still remember the day I went from a lurker to a poster only to be welcomed by a very elderly Jacobite who when informed me that as a Scottish Conservative I was most welcome because we don't have many of them here. Back in the early days I was ChrisD until someone one night got annoyed about the sheer amount of Chris's on the site and I then changed my name to ChristinaD only to discover that despite being a 40 year old married Mum of three more than one regular had assumed I was a single gay man because not only I did I not share personal details back then it was almost a given I had to male.
But over the next few years we finally built up a very formidable but small regular female presence on the site, and yes lads, we formed a bit of a collective and talked off piste. But the biggest irony for me is that I became good friends on here with the then only female SNP supporter on the site despite our political differences. And I am genuinely really sad today at the lack of openly female voices on here since my return to posting, even more sad now with the absence of the last really fiesty female voice on the site in Cyclefree who has done so much heavy lifting on her own as a regular contributor in recent years.
This fundamentally misunderstands Trump. There is no bargain to which Trump (or Putin come to mention it) will keep. Agreeing a deal lasts only as long as Trump or Putin finds it convenient to abide by a deal.
The correct thing to do is to tell Putin and Trump to fuck off, and to then throw everything we have behind Ukraine.
But that requires courage that our leaders lack. The path of least resistance is -sadly- a path that leads to ever more misery and death.
Nothing must be allowed to get in the way of his Nobel peace prize.
Wasn't Tacitus being critical when he wrote of creating a desert/devastation/waste and calling it peace?
It's also probable that this 'ceasefire' is designed to take attention away from Trump and Epstein.
So it's possible that Epstein's evil will lead to a hot war in Europe.
I think it evidence of Trump's decline into senility. His existing personality becomes more rigid, his attention span fades and his desires become more base. Theres no other reason to feather his nest so enthusiastically. He doesn't need money where he is going.
Ukraine doesn't matter at all. It's a failed stated that is entirely dependent on its parasitical relationship with the taxpayers of the EU and UK. I hope they think Hunter Biden was worth it. If they'd fucked him over when Trump asked, they'd be in a far happier position now.
(*) Wrongly IMO
And you have to admit that the ex-Soviet states that got into bed with the West have done rather better than those that stayed in the Russian orbit, no?
You really should learn something about that part of the world. And about Trump for that matter - he expects everybody else to do him favours, but rarely if ever returns them.
Ukraine isn't a failed state at all - it has a functioning government, a democratic opposition, a reasonably free press and a heroic President.
It isn't "entirely dependent" on its "parasitical relationship" with EU and UK taxpayers at all - of Ukraine's state budget of $74 billion, only about $11 billion comes from international grants, and much of that was from the interest on frozen Russian assets, not European taxpayers.
https://kyivindependent.com/ukrainians-pay-24-billion-in-taxes-in-2024/
If anybody is the parasite, it's us - giving pitifully inadequate aid while a brave democracy holds back an evil and aggressive dictatorship at enormous cost in money and men.
Do you see the post-1990 configuration of the Baltic states to be 'politically sustainable' ?
(Where I think you mean 'political sustainable' to mean Putin won't stand for it...)
A failed state is one that is incapable of governing itself, rather than one that it is under foreign attack.
World’s smallest violin etc etc.
https://x.com/sunniewithrain/status/1953620690755891246?s=61
If Newsom is only getting 23% in his own state... well, it's not a great start is it?
Not that I'll ever go to see her show...
Interesting that Buttigieg scores so high. Presumably because he was on the box duffing up Fox News anchors so often?
Or both.
Ukraine is an imperfect state, with corruption and a number of other issues, but it's biggest problem is it's neighbour.
Keni believes that she has to tack hard right to see off Jenrick / to compete with Reform. On TwiX they are posting some extraordinary stuff about deporting people.
Every single response pointing- and I do mean every single one - attacks them and points out they had 14 years and did nothing.
They think “let’s go hardline and we’ll be relevant to racists”. But all they have done is remind people that it’s their fault.
Suddenly the polls reducing them to 29 seats make sense…
Which would mean they are given Ukraine their own land back in exchange for taking more of it.
If this is Donald Trump's idea of making deals, no wonder he kept going bust. Even Keir Starmer can negotiate better than that.
But comedy, and humour, is in the eye of the beholder. I tried watching Mrs Brown's Boys and found it awful; neither Mrs J nor myself found The Office in any way funny. But we both loved Two Pints and League of Gentlemen.
I daresay her brand of comedy might not be to your tastes; but others may enjoy it. And there's also the possibility that the description is part of the act.
Good morning, everyone.
It's almost as though, in your eyes, Russia and Putin are in the right.
Either that, or you're just an edgelord Walt.
NEW THREAD
Or rather, it is not allowed to know.