American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
Not my words - Beth Rigby
But you missed out the next part.
Here's the full interview, you should be ashamed that you used that quote without her following words.
From 1min 40 secs onwards, PBers can see for themselves.
BigG is clearly misrepresentimg both Starmer's words and Sky's reporting. For once the Telegraph headline is more accurate than some of the PB commentary.
'Europe rejects Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine'
That seems a pretty fair summary of what has happened this afternoon when you cut through the very necessary diplomatic language.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
RCS's post that (if true) Starmer is contemptible scum is racking up viral likes!
Halfway round the world, truth still lacing up its plimsolls.
Just shows it's so easy to think the worst of Starmer...
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
Not my words - Beth Rigby
But you missed out the next part.
Here's the full interview, you should be ashamed that you used that quote without her following words.
From 1min 40 secs onwards, PBers can see for themselves.
BigG is clearly misrepresentimg both Starmer's words and Sky's reporting. For once the Telegraph headline is more accurate than some of the PB commentary.
'Europe rejects Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine'
That seems a pretty fair summary of what has happened this afternoon when you cut through the very necessary diplomatic language.
I didn't quote Starmer but Rigby certainly said Starmer was using whack a mole in regards to upsetting Trump
It was not meant to be misleading but as I heard it but if I am wrong then I apologise
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
Not my words - Beth Rigby
That isn't how @TheScreamingEagles and @DougSeal have explained the statement. I am more comfortable with their analysis than Beth Rigby's.
As I said earlier her words did raise an eyebrow
You'll be steering the markets from Threadneedle Street next ..
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
Not my words - Beth Rigby
But you missed out the next part.
Here's the full interview, you should be ashamed that you used that quote without her following words.
From 1min 40 secs onwards, PBers can see for themselves.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
I think Starmer is trying to subvert the deal by making it more acceptable to Ukraine while pretending it's still Donald Trump's proposal. Questions are whether the chasm between the US/Russia position and the Ukrainian one is bridgeable and what happens if not.
The EU and the UK do appear to be asleep at the wheel since the Oval Office suit fiasco.
NATO is currently dead on its arse. Trump has undermined it whilst Rutte seems like a rabbit in the headlights.
One purpose of international organisations is to allow national 'leaders' to avoid taking decisions.
The EU and NATO cannot stop Russia but Poland and Germany can.
I don't understand your fixation with a unilateral Poland taking on the Russian Bear. What is the point of them being in NATO or the EU if they have to go it alone.
I don't think it should be unilateral, I think other countries should support Poland in so doing.
But relying on EU or NATO approval means that the likes of Trump and Orban would be given a veto.
Which is very handy for those countries which are happy to do nothing.
Actually they wouldn't be given a veto - at least not in the terms you mean. NATO operates by concensus but without votes. So if some countries do not agree with a course of action then they agree to disagree. It doesn’t stop other countries from continuing to operate under the NATO umbrella.
Of course practically doing this without the US woild be more difficult. Less so without Hungary.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
I think Starmer is trying to subvert the deal by making it more acceptable to Ukraine while pretending it's still Donald Trump's proposal. Questions are whether the chasm between the US/Russia position and the Ukrainian one is bridgeable and what happens if not.
The EU and the UK do appear to be asleep at the wheel since the Oval Office suit fiasco.
NATO is currently dead on its arse. Trump has undermined it whilst Rutte seems like a rabbit in the headlights.
One purpose of international organisations is to allow national 'leaders' to avoid taking decisions.
The EU and NATO cannot stop Russia but Poland and Germany can.
I don't understand your fixation with a unilateral Poland taking on the Russian Bear. What is the point of them being in NATO or the EU if they have to go it alone.
Preventing the tail from being able to wag the dog is a prerequisite for any military alliance.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
RCS's post that (if true) Starmer is contemptible scum is racking up viral likes!
Halfway round the world, truth still lacing up its plimsolls.
Just shows it's so easy to think the worst of Starmer...
I suspect it tells us more about the blind partisanship of PB. Good work on behalf of the Tory Party from BigG. nonetheless.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
I’m left wondering what happened to trigger this development, given that the US and Trump seemed to be hardening in their rhetoric towards Russia in recent months, and softening towards Ukraine.
Some sort of blackmail, perhaps? National or personal.
It doesn't really matter.
What's very clear is that the US is trying to force a capitulation, in the space of a week, which would see Europe, at best, in a state of cold war, with all the costs that entails, for the foreseeable future.
At worst, it sets the conditions for another invasion at far worse odds for Europe than exist now.
Which is why Europe's leaders need to tell Trump no and act in support of Ukraine.
That means Starmer, Macron, Merz and most of all Tusk.
It means all of them together. Without that there isn't much of enough significance that any one country can do on its own.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
Not my words - Beth Rigby
But you missed out the next part.
Here's the full interview, you should be ashamed that you used that quote without her following words.
From 1min 40 secs onwards, PBers can see for themselves.
BigG is clearly misrepresentimg both Starmer's words and Sky's reporting. For once the Telegraph headline is more accurate than some of the PB commentary.
'Europe rejects Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine'
That seems a pretty fair summary of what has happened this afternoon when you cut through the very necessary diplomatic language.
Unfortunately, it probably shows a couple of things that are causing us problems in society.
One is that even respectable news outlets like Sky are prone to the sort of sensation-mongering that used to be the preserve of tabloids and the worst sort of blog writers. You know the kind of guy I mean.
The other is that we've all forgotten the lesson of Operation Bodyguard- truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies. Churchill said it about wartime, but there are peacetime situations where it's true also. Permanews means that we are bombarded with soundbites, and we naively assume that those soundbites represent the truth or what the speaker really thinks. Sometimes they are just what the speaker has to say to prevent all hell breaking loose.
It doesn't hope that, because we're all human, we tend to look for quotes that support what we already believe, and reasons to play down quotes that contradict those beliefs. As the sterotypical sermon goes, "I know I do".
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
And European governments: maybe concentrate on getting domestic demand moving. It's not healthy to be so dependent on external demand. Those massive German surpluses are not a sign of strength, they are one of weakness: lets get Germans buying new Mercedes.
This kind of nonsense will only end when Ukraine gets nuclear weapons. Big, fuck off ones.
The only way Ukraine is getting nuclear weapons is as the recipient courtesy of Putin if he looks likes he is losing.
Wrong.
They have multiple metric tons of plutonium in the cooling ponds at the nuclear power stations.
It’s in expended fuel rods - dissolve and precipitate the plutonium. It’s simple chemistry,
The plutonium is so called Civil Plutonium - lots of Pu-240 mixed in with Pu-239.
Well should be*
Anyway, the 240 comes from running at high power to generate ‘leccy.
Supposedly anything at 20% 240 is not Bomb Grade.
But in the 1960s, the US detonated a bomb made with 25% Pu-240 - bought from the UK, only enough.
Pu-240 is a pain in the arse for a bomb designer - but it’s still usable.
A two stage all fission design would work and yield 100kt plus.
I’d expect a flying plate implosion system - unless they went full modern and went for crushing weird shapes to spheres…
Why do you think Putin & Co have been demanding control of all nuclear power stations in Ukraine?
*the traditional method to make bomb grade plutonium is to put it in a reactor run at lower neutron flux (less power). And/Or less time on he reactor. The safeguard people try to watch for this, but in war torn Ukraine, unloading some fuel rods early might have been possible.
This Newsagents chat with Kenneth Clarke is 50 minutes of nostalgiafest for aging One Nation Tories; younger viewers might be interested in a glimpse of how it was in the olden days. Worth 50 minutes of your life, but nothing very surprising WRT opinions.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
My parents (Mr & Mrs Stodge Senior) bought their four bedroom home for £11,000 in 1966 and sold out for £375,000 in 2000 so a 34-fold increase in as many years (not many investments do that well) except the house was then sold for £865,000 in 2014 so more than doubled even further (even with inflation). Two generations of older people have done phenomenally well out of the house market.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
This is our continent, and there has been zero consultation with either Europe or the UK.
..The announcement of the US plans earlier this week blindsided other Ukraine allies, who had been kept in the dark over the content and format of the plan. There is concern in Europe that Russia has had too much say in negotiating a draft agreement, which is being presented to the Ukrainians as a done deal.
Driscoll defended this, saying it kept the process more manageable. “President Trump wants peace now. The more cooks in the kitchen, the harder it is to handle,” he said, according to the source present.
Julie Davis, the US chargée d’affaires in Kyiv, was also present at the meeting and told the other diplomats that although the terms of the deal were punishing for Ukraine, it had little choice but to accept or face worse in future. “The deal does not get better from here, it gets worse,” she said.
Trump is keen for Zelenskyy to agree to the deal by Thanksgiving, which is on Thursday..
These are not serious people, but this is extremely serious, possibly existential for our future.
It was always going to come down to the question of when would Trump decide to stop helping Ukraine.
Issue is that any stop now will just give Russia a few years to rearm before they start again...
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
What is actually happening is that mortgage lenders are backing away from the mire extreme mortgage offers.
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers are taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
Yes, the Polanski Greens have now taken the place of Your Party as the natural home for the Corbynite Starmer hating old leftie.
Though Your Party could still win a few seats in Muslim heavy areas like Birmingham, Dewsbury, Leicester and Blackburn the Independent Alliance won seats in 2024 plus maybe in Bradford and Slough and Luton and Newham and Tower Hamlets
question.
GPEW 170k members. 100k of them new to the party. Are there really that many Corbynites?
And tbh, I’d say we have loads of small c conservatives looking for a home too. Water company and rail nationalisation, looking after the environment. Keeping the NHS. It’s their kind of thing.
Meetings are getting quite interesting.
Those small "c" conservatives will be first out the door when they realise the true political offering of Polanski. It really won't be their kind of thing.
I hadn’t looked into him better. From Wikipedia:
“Polanski worked with the theatre company DifferencENGINE as an immersive theatre actor…”
😂 There will be some hilarious video to emerge for the election of him pretending to be a tree or something.
Here's the trailer one he was in The People's Revolt.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
What is actually happening is that mortgage lenders are backing away from the mire extreme mortgage offers.
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers are taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
I don't think we should be that concerned about the "top of the market". Unless there is a good reason.
People up there are big and bad enough to take the slings and arrows.
So they lose a slice of their unearned, untaxed froth. So what?
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
What is actually happening is that mortgage lenders are backing away from the mire extreme mortgage offers.
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
I don't think we should be that concerned about the "top of the market".
People up there are big and bad enough to take the slings and arrowed.
So they lose a slice of their unearned, untaxed froth. So what?
The people with piles of cash will take a larger slice of the same market. At each level in the housing market.
Because their competitors won’t be able to get mortgages.
But don’t worry, the people with pikes of cash will buy for less. The people who can’t get mortgages can rent from them…
Summation - we need 8 million more properties. That will fix the housing market for everyone.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
My parents (Mr & Mrs Stodge Senior) bought their four bedroom home for £11,000 in 1966 and sold out for £375,000 in 2000 so a 34-fold increase in as many years (not many investments do that well) except the house was then sold for £865,000 in 2014 so more than doubled even further (even with inflation). Two generations of older people have done phenomenally well out of the house market.
Similar with ourselves
Bought our 4 bed home in 1976 for £16,000 and is now worth in excess of £500,000
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
What is actually happening is that mortgage lenders are backing away from the mire extreme mortgage offers.
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
I don't think we should be that concerned about the "top of the market".
People up there are big and bad enough to take the slings and arrowed.
So they lose a slice of their unearned, untaxed froth. So what?
The people with piles of cash will take a larger slice of the same market. At each level in the housing market.
Because their competitors won’t be able to get mortgages.
But don’t worry, the people with pikes of cash will buy for less. The people who can’t get mortgages can rent from them…
Summation - we need 8 million more properties. That will fix the housing market for everyone.
Why will the people with the piles of cash not take a larger share of your enlarged market for investment?
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Yes, stop the pandering, I'd love to see that, but can we answer "yes" to the million dollar question that lies at the heart of all this - if the US walk away can European nations (politically, militarily, financially) provide Ukraine with enough support to keep fighting Russia until all or most of their territory is reclaimed?
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
Starmer isn't trying to get this 'deal' agreed. C'mon. Inverted commas since I don't think it should be called a deal. It's an unrealistic proposal from only one of the two warring nations (Russia).
I think Ukraine and European nations should come up with their own 28 point plan (very loosely based on the US/Russian plan) and give Russia and the USA until Thursday to agree it.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Clarke seems to be wearing pretty well, but I was struck by the threadbare nature of his Starmer/Reeves critique. His criticisms were mostly about presentation and political management (though he did attack Reeves for refusing to cut spending - correctly imo).
Antony Seldon, another centrist 'grandee' was even worse on his book promotion interviews. His attack was mainly that Starmer shouldn't have sacked Sue Gray or dared to rebuke Chris Wormald. In other words that his lack of success is because he isn't enough of a creature of the establishment.
Neither had anything to say about or any solutions to the UK's deeper issues - the difficulties of building, investing, starting or running a business. Public sector underperformance. Centrism is an empty vessel these days. It has been found out.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
Has to be nonsense. 100%.
If such an accusation proves to be false, that is a little bit naughty from our Sky correspondent.
FFS. That’s a total misrepresentation of what Sky is saying. I don’t think the guy’s very good either but I’m amazed no one on here has accused him of being Jack the Ripper. Sky say -
“The prime minister said on Saturday that there was "more to do on the plan" in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva. He said he would speak to President Zelenskyy later on Saturday as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine's favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia. But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump. … One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a "game of whack-a-mole" over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine. The prime minister has yet to talk to the US president about the plan, but says he will talk to him in the coming days. "I'm absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he's taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I've had with him," Starmer said. "So I know what he's trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that." But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump's Thursday deadline. “
That being so, BigG's interpretation is wholly disingenuous. He needs to apologise.
I don't think using Ukraine as a party political point scoring exercise is acceptable.
Not my words - Beth Rigby
But you missed out the next part.
Here's the full interview, you should be ashamed that you used that quote without her following words.
From 1min 40 secs onwards, PBers can see for themselves.
BigG is clearly misrepresentimg both Starmer's words and Sky's reporting. For once the Telegraph headline is more accurate than some of the PB commentary.
'Europe rejects Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine'
That seems a pretty fair summary of what has happened this afternoon when you cut through the very necessary diplomatic language.
I didn't quote Starmer but Rigby certainly said Starmer was using whack a mole in regards to upsetting Trump
It was not meant to be misleading but as I heard it but if I am wrong then I apologise
I am always ready to apologise when necessary
You said he was using “whack a mole” to “stop them rebelling” which was, doubtlessly inadvertently, misleading. Anyway, no point dwelling on it.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
What is actually happening is that mortgage lenders are backing away from the mire extreme mortgage offers.
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
I don't think we should be that concerned about the "top of the market".
People up there are big and bad enough to take the slings and arrowed.
So they lose a slice of their unearned, untaxed froth. So what?
The people with piles of cash will take a larger slice of the same market. At each level in the housing market.
Because their competitors won’t be able to get mortgages.
But don’t worry, the people with pikes of cash will buy for less. The people who can’t get mortgages can rent from them…
Summation - we need 8 million more properties. That will fix the housing market for everyone.
Why will the people with the piles of cash not take a larger share of your enlarged market for investment?
Because housing demand isn’t infinite.
As house prices fall from a genuine increase in supply, rents will fall as well.
Why try and corner a market to get smaller and smaller returns, by investing in a depreciating asset?
Clarke seems to be wearing pretty well, but I was struck by the threadbare nature of his Starmer/Reeves critique. His criticisms were mostly about presentation and political management (though he did attack Reeves for refusing to cut spending - correctly imo).
Antony Seldon, another centrist 'grandee' was even worse on his book promotion interviews. His attack was mainly that Starmer shouldn't have sacked Sue Gray or dared to rebuke Chris Wormald. In other words that his lack of success is because he isn't enough of a creature of the establishment.
Neither had anything to say about or any solutions to the UK's deeper issues - the difficulties of building, investing, starting or running a business. Public sector underperformance. Centrism is an empty vessel these days. It has been found out.
My view is nobody has 'solutions' as such because all politicians can do in a democratic developed nation is make things slightly better, slightly worse, or a lot worse. There isn't a 'lots better' option. Not in any sort of electoral timeframe. People believing otherwise is largely what fuels populist chancers. Not blaming people btw - it's what almost all politicians seeking office tell them. That they can fix things.
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Yes, stop the pandering, I'd love to see that, but can we answer "yes" to the million dollar question that lies at the heart of all this - if the US walk away can European nations (politically, militarily, financially) provide Ukraine with enough support to keep fighting Russia until all or most of their territory is reclaimed?
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
I’m left wondering what happened to trigger this development, given that the US and Trump seemed to be hardening in their rhetoric towards Russia in recent months, and softening towards Ukraine.
Some sort of blackmail, perhaps? National or personal.
Kompromat. Putin has one shot to use it before Epstein destroys its value.
Are you suggesting Epstein is why Trump has gone full Nathan Gill for Russia?
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Yes, stop the pandering, I'd love to see that, but can we answer "yes" to the million dollar question that lies at the heart of all this - if the US walk away can European nations (politically, militarily, financially) provide Ukraine with enough support to keep fighting Russia until all or most of their territory is reclaimed?
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
I’m left wondering what happened to trigger this development, given that the US and Trump seemed to be hardening in their rhetoric towards Russia in recent months, and softening towards Ukraine.
Some sort of blackmail, perhaps? National or personal.
Kompromat. Putin has one shot to use it before Epstein destroys its value.
Are You suggesting Epstein is why Trump has gone full Nathan Gill for Russia?
Something (whether Epstein or something else) is afoot, I reckon.
National Crime Agency Report on a money laundering network in the service of the Russian state.
Multinational and 128 arrests in the UK so far.
The NCA have identified that a billion-dollar money laundering network active in the UK purchased a bank in Kyrgyzstan to facilitate sanctions evasion and payments in support of Russian military efforts.
Through Operation Destabilise, the NCA and its partners are targeting money launderers who work for this network and are known to operate in at least 28 UK cities and towns.
For a fee, the launderers collect ‘dirty’ cash generated from the drugs trade, firearms supply, and organised immigration crime, and convert it to ‘clean’ cryptocurrency.
These ‘cash to crypto’ swaps are an integral part of a global criminal ecosystem that spans offending in our communities, sanctions evasions and the highest levels of organised crime, including providing money laundering services to the Russian state.
I do feel for world leaders like Starmer and Macron. It would be a hell of a thing to tell Trump to go **** himself, double down on European support for Ukraine, and commit to pushing back the Russian bear alone. It would break the transatlantic alliance for at least three years, and possibly forever, and cost squillions to even half replace the Yanks.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
What a pathetic contribution from Ed Davey. If this is a "once-in-a-generation threat" then calling for Russia to be removed from the G20 is a totally inadequate response.
Putin's ambitions to conquer Ukraine and recreate the Russian Empire pose a once-in-a-generation threat to the whole of Europe. We cannot allow Trump to reward his aggression.
The Prime Minister must use this opportunity to call for Russia to be removed from the G20.
I do feel for world leaders like Starmer and Macron. It would be a hell of a thing to tell Trump to go **** himself, double down on European support for Ukraine, and commit to pushing back the Russian bear alone. It would break the transatlantic alliance for at least three years, and possibly forever, and cost squillions to even half replace the Yanks.
But we’re close to the point that they have to.
I think we are beyond that point, Starmer needs to pull his finger out.
If the Ukraine clock ticks on for another four years a Reform Britain might be joining a third term Trump administration USA off the pitch, showered and already on the bus home.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
IIRC it's Beverley's party really. Abigail is the neighbour Sue's 15 year old daughter - her party is one we never see, although I suspect it was much more fun.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
I think Starmer is trying to subvert the deal by making it more acceptable to Ukraine while pretending it's still Donald Trump's proposal. Questions are whether the chasm between the US/Russia position and the Ukrainian one is bridgeable and what happens if not.
The EU and the UK do appear to be asleep at the wheel since the Oval Office suit fiasco.
NATO is currently dead on its arse. Trump has undermined it whilst Rutte seems like a rabbit in the headlights.
Merz, Macron and Starmer seem very aligned. They are also talking a lot to Zelenskyy who does appear ready to deal on not particularly favourable terms - presumably Ukraine is exhausted. When push comes to shove i suspect all three of them will choose America over Ukraine. They don't want to make that choice but are perhaps being forced into it.
Then that would be the wrong choice. Why on earth should we choose America, who have proven themselves to be unfaithful allies, bullying trade partners and capable of electing morons like Donald J Trump? What on earth is left for us amongst the wreckage that moron has weaved? It is time to recognise that they are no longer friends, no longer reliable and no longer any basis for our future security. In contrast, Ukraine has fought with incredible bravery against an evil dictator and made us all much safer by destroying their conventional capabilities. We need to get behind them 100% and promise that we, and all other European countries, will do whatever it takes to allow them to prevail whether Trump wants it or not.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
That is universal, surely, for about 80-90% of the population, not just London.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
Abigail's only 15. I know we did things differently back in the 70s but 15 was still too young to marry.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
I always perceived Abigail as a downmarket (say, Penge vs Surbiton) version of Margot Ledbetter.
I do feel for world leaders like Starmer and Macron. It would be a hell of a thing to tell Trump to go **** himself, double down on European support for Ukraine, and commit to pushing back the Russian bear alone. It would break the transatlantic alliance for at least three years, and possibly forever, and cost squillions to even half replace the Yanks.
But we’re close to the point that they have to.
Well, it would only break the transatlantic alliance to the extent that Trump chose to break it.
Breaking it would be extremely expensive for US defence companies.
And if the Europeans were determined to support Ukraine, then given such support was almost certainly result in victory for Ukraine and for the fall of Putin, then Trump has to make a very difficult choice: total isolation (with all the downsides for US companies that currently sit astride the world), or pretend that he always backed Europe and Ukraine.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
Abigail's only 15. I know we did things differently back in the 70s but 15 was still too young to marry.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
That is universal, surely, for about 80-90% of the population, not just London.
And is no excuse for not fixing the market.
Or may be just the 50% of the population who are home owners?
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
What is actually happening is that mortgage lenders are backing away from the mire extreme mortgage offers.
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
I don't think we should be that concerned about the "top of the market".
People up there are big and bad enough to take the slings and arrowed.
So they lose a slice of their unearned, untaxed froth. So what?
The people with piles of cash will take a larger slice of the same market. At each level in the housing market.
Because their competitors won’t be able to get mortgages.
But don’t worry, the people with pikes of cash will buy for less. The people who can’t get mortgages can rent from them…
Summation - we need 8 million more properties. That will fix the housing market for everyone.
Why will the people with the piles of cash not take a larger share of your enlarged market for investment?
Because housing demand isn’t infinite.
As house prices fall from a genuine increase in supply, rents will fall as well.
Why try and corner a market to get smaller and smaller returns, by investing in a depreciating asset?
Do you have a timeline for this project?
8 millions dwellings is just under two and a half Londons.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
I always perceived Abigail as a downmarket (say, Penge vs Surbiton) version of Margot Ledbetter.
National Crime Agency Report on a money laundering network in the service of the Russian state.
Multinational and 128 arrests in the UK so far.
The NCA have identified that a billion-dollar money laundering network active in the UK purchased a bank in Kyrgyzstan to facilitate sanctions evasion and payments in support of Russian military efforts.
Through Operation Destabilise, the NCA and its partners are targeting money launderers who work for this network and are known to operate in at least 28 UK cities and towns.
For a fee, the launderers collect ‘dirty’ cash generated from the drugs trade, firearms supply, and organised immigration crime, and convert it to ‘clean’ cryptocurrency.
These ‘cash to crypto’ swaps are an integral part of a global criminal ecosystem that spans offending in our communities, sanctions evasions and the highest levels of organised crime, including providing money laundering services to the Russian state.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
I think Starmer is trying to subvert the deal by making it more acceptable to Ukraine while pretending it's still Donald Trump's proposal. Questions are whether the chasm between the US/Russia position and the Ukrainian one is bridgeable and what happens if not.
The EU and the UK do appear to be asleep at the wheel since the Oval Office suit fiasco.
NATO is currently dead on its arse. Trump has undermined it whilst Rutte seems like a rabbit in the headlights.
Merz, Macron and Starmer seem very aligned. They are also talking a lot to Zelenskyy who does appear ready to deal on not particularly favourable terms - presumably Ukraine is exhausted. When push comes to shove i suspect all three of them will choose America over Ukraine. They don't want to make that choice but are perhaps being forced into it.
Then that would be the wrong choice. Why on earth should we choose America, who have proven themselves to be unfaithful allies, bullying trade partners and capable of electing morons like Donald J Trump? What on earth is left for us amongst the wreckage that moron has weaved? It is time to recognise that they are no longer friends, no longer reliable and no longer any basis for our future security. In contrast, Ukraine has fought with incredible bravery against an evil dictator and made us all much safer by destroying their conventional capabilities. We need to get behind them 100% and promise that we, and all other European countries, will do whatever it takes to allow them to prevail whether Trump wants it or not.
I agree.
I just realised my comment reads that Starmer and other European leaders would be forced into "that choice", ie America over Ukraine. when I meant they would be forced into making a choice between the two. Sadly I suspect they would choose America.
I do feel for world leaders like Starmer and Macron. It would be a hell of a thing to tell Trump to go **** himself, double down on European support for Ukraine, and commit to pushing back the Russian bear alone. It would break the transatlantic alliance for at least three years, and possibly forever, and cost squillions to even half replace the Yanks.
But we’re close to the point that they have to.
Well, it would only break the transatlantic alliance to the extent that Trump chose to break it.
Breaking it would be extremely expensive for US defence companies.
And if the Europeans were determined to support Ukraine, then given such support was almost certainly result in victory for Ukraine and for the fall of Putin, then Trump has to make a very difficult choice: total isolation (with all the downsides for US companies that currently sit astride the world), or pretend that he always backed Europe and Ukraine.
As we see from his love-in with Mamdani, Trump can swivel very fast when he needs to.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
Abigail's only 15. I know we did things differently back in the 70s but 15 was still too young to marry.
Yes, it was Abigails mum at the party, and she was the middle class one that the others aspire to be.
I do feel for world leaders like Starmer and Macron. It would be a hell of a thing to tell Trump to go **** himself, double down on European support for Ukraine, and commit to pushing back the Russian bear alone. It would break the transatlantic alliance for at least three years, and possibly forever, and cost squillions to even half replace the Yanks.
But we’re close to the point that they have to.
Well, it would only break the transatlantic alliance to the extent that Trump chose to break it.
Breaking it would be extremely expensive for US defence companies.
And if the Europeans were determined to support Ukraine, then given such support was almost certainly result in victory for Ukraine and for the fall of Putin, then Trump has to make a very difficult choice: total isolation (with all the downsides for US companies that currently sit astride the world), or pretend that he always backed Europe and Ukraine.
I think we are getting to the point when we should give Russia an ultimatum: either withdraw all their forces from Ukrainian soil, all of it, or the conventional armies of western Europe will engage in Ukraine's support.
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
I’m left wondering what happened to trigger this development, given that the US and Trump seemed to be hardening in their rhetoric towards Russia in recent months, and softening towards Ukraine.
Some sort of blackmail, perhaps? National or personal.
Kompromat. Putin has one shot to use it before Epstein destroys its value.
Are you suggesting Epstein is why Trump has gone full Nathan Gill for Russia?
What a pathetic contribution from Ed Davey. If this is a "once-in-a-generation threat" then calling for Russia to be removed from the G20 is a totally inadequate response.
Putin's ambitions to conquer Ukraine and recreate the Russian Empire pose a once-in-a-generation threat to the whole of Europe. We cannot allow Trump to reward his aggression.
The Prime Minister must use this opportunity to call for Russia to be removed from the G20.
That is to suggest that he's had nothing else to say on the matter, which is either dishonest or plain ignorant.
FPT #hyufd said: On average though Surrey is not only posher than Essex but probably the poshest county in England, although the Cotswolds belt of Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire and Berkshire and Bucks are not far behind, all also areas the LDs now have lots of MPs.
@HYUFD I agree with what you have just said there wholeheartedly. Don't disagree with a single word of it. Unfortunately this was not the point you were making in the first place when I pointed out that places like Guildford, Woking and Camberley were not full of posh people. The towns are not particularly posh. The countryside around is a lot posher.
Just by complete chance I was just sent the following link. As you will see I could have written it with Sheerwater and places in Guildford getting particularly reference for their deprivation. Remember I mentioned Sheerwater and you claimed it not to be deprived because of house prices?
They are posh towns, unless you define posh as aristocracy and landed gentry only.
Sheerwater may have some pockets of deprivation but it still has an average house price higher than the average for all of Essex, let alone areas like Harlow, Basildon and Clacton and Southend
American is now actively threatening Ukraine in an attempt to force them to accept, at extraordinarily short notice a deal which would see them abandon a fortified front line; officially hand over territory to an illegal invader; cut their armed forces; restrict their legal right to defend themselves against future aggression; limit their sovereignty to make alliances; require them to rewrite their constitution; refuse the rest of Europe the right to station forces in their soil; indemnify Russia against any and all the war crimes it has committed - including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians; pay future monetary tribute to the US;
In return for zero concessions from Russia.
This is madness.
It is simply betrayal of Ukraine and unforgiveable
Sky reporting Starmer is 'whack a mole' European leaders in trying to stop them rebelling
If so he is as bad as Trump and should be ashamed
My daughter in law in Vancouver and all her family are off Ukrainian descent
If Starmer really has signed up to the US plan, he is utterly contemptible scum.
I would agree, but I'd like a reliable citation. This seems at odds with Starmer's previous position.
I think Starmer is trying to subvert the deal by making it more acceptable to Ukraine while pretending it's still Donald Trump's proposal. Questions are whether the chasm between the US/Russia position and the Ukrainian one is bridgeable and what happens if not.
The EU and the UK do appear to be asleep at the wheel since the Oval Office suit fiasco.
NATO is currently dead on its arse. Trump has undermined it whilst Rutte seems like a rabbit in the headlights.
Merz, Macron and Starmer seem very aligned. They are also talking a lot to Zelenskyy who does appear ready to deal on not particularly favourable terms - presumably Ukraine is exhausted. When push comes to shove i suspect all three of them will choose America over Ukraine. They don't want to make that choice but are perhaps being forced into it.
Then that would be the wrong choice. Why on earth should we choose America, who have proven themselves to be unfaithful allies, bullying trade partners and capable of electing morons like Donald J Trump? What on earth is left for us amongst the wreckage that moron has weaved? It is time to recognise that they are no longer friends, no longer reliable and no longer any basis for our future security. In contrast, Ukraine has fought with incredible bravery against an evil dictator and made us all much safer by destroying their conventional capabilities. We need to get behind them 100% and promise that we, and all other European countries, will do whatever it takes to allow them to prevail whether Trump wants it or not.
In any event it isn't that choice.
It's a choice between cooperating with a rogue president, who is massively unpopular in his own county, in the selling out of Europe's future security, and saying NO.
It would be an uncomfortable choice to say no, but not a disastrous one like the alternative.
And the US might eventually be grateful to us for it.
I do feel for world leaders like Starmer and Macron. It would be a hell of a thing to tell Trump to go **** himself, double down on European support for Ukraine, and commit to pushing back the Russian bear alone. It would break the transatlantic alliance for at least three years, and possibly forever, and cost squillions to even half replace the Yanks.
But we’re close to the point that they have to.
Well, it would only break the transatlantic alliance to the extent that Trump chose to break it.
Breaking it would be extremely expensive for US defence companies.
And if the Europeans were determined to support Ukraine, then given such support was almost certainly result in victory for Ukraine and for the fall of Putin, then Trump has to make a very difficult choice: total isolation (with all the downsides for US companies that currently sit astride the world), or pretend that he always backed Europe and Ukraine.
As we see from his love-in with Mamdani, Trump can swivel very fast when he needs to.
All the other words except those in bold can be dispensed with.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
IIRC it's Beverley's party really. Abigail is the neighbour Sue's 15 year old daughter - her party is one we never see, although I suspect it was much more fun.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
I always perceived Abigail as a downmarket (say, Penge vs Surbiton) version of Margot Ledbetter.
Beverley!
Yes. I associated Alison Steadman with Abigail. Of course she is not Abigail, my bad!
‘Russian links to Reform need investigating’, he says. So why is his government still fighting case now in Grand Chamber of Strasbourg court refusing to have such an investigation into Russian interference ??
What a pathetic contribution from Ed Davey. If this is a "once-in-a-generation threat" then calling for Russia to be removed from the G20 is a totally inadequate response.
Putin's ambitions to conquer Ukraine and recreate the Russian Empire pose a once-in-a-generation threat to the whole of Europe. We cannot allow Trump to reward his aggression.
The Prime Minister must use this opportunity to call for Russia to be removed from the G20.
you'd know about pathetic contributions miscegenationphobe
What a pathetic contribution from Ed Davey. If this is a "once-in-a-generation threat" then calling for Russia to be removed from the G20 is a totally inadequate response.
Putin's ambitions to conquer Ukraine and recreate the Russian Empire pose a once-in-a-generation threat to the whole of Europe. We cannot allow Trump to reward his aggression.
The Prime Minister must use this opportunity to call for Russia to be removed from the G20.
So far this evening we have called two party leader traitors out on PB. The only patriot left by the time the clock strikes midnight will be Farage.
That's now three podcasts I've listened to where a deep concern was expressed about London house prices should a flat rate council tax/additional bands be introduced.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
The truth is many people in London see their property as their sole capital asset - selling that and downsizing to the country is their pension pot. As we know, £1 million doesn't go far in some parts of London but much further beyond the capital.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
Yep exactly. Compared with all the other options, property is a risk-free and tax efficient store and generator of wealth - with the added bonus that you get to live in it. My firm belief is a tax on it would bring prices back to something more reasonable by negating that effect.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
What is actually happening is that mortgage lenders are backing away from the mire extreme mortgage offers.
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
I don't think we should be that concerned about the "top of the market".
People up there are big and bad enough to take the slings and arrowed.
So they lose a slice of their unearned, untaxed froth. So what?
The people with piles of cash will take a larger slice of the same market. At each level in the housing market.
Because their competitors won’t be able to get mortgages.
But don’t worry, the people with pikes of cash will buy for less. The people who can’t get mortgages can rent from them…
Summation - we need 8 million more properties. That will fix the housing market for everyone.
Why will the people with the piles of cash not take a larger share of your enlarged market for investment?
Because housing demand isn’t infinite.
As house prices fall from a genuine increase in supply, rents will fall as well.
Why try and corner a market to get smaller and smaller returns, by investing in a depreciating asset?
I think I see it from another perspective.
The cash buyer and inequality feeds off a broken market.
Supply will never exceed demand. The builders will not build homes they cannot sell.
And it’s worse than that. First time buyers are in rented property where rent is tending to the unaffordable.
For that reason the average first time buyer is now in their late 30s due to the size of the required deposit.
So it’s clear that the rent being charged keeps down the number of buyers available. ( I bet most people on pb bought in their 20s )
And wealth from rents creates cash buyers.
8m homes aren’t going to happen while the system makes the rich richer and keeps the poor poor.
All the while the government supports rents, and keeps prices high by subsidising a small number of first time buyers into the market.
‘Russian links to Reform need investigating’, he says. So why is his government still fighting case now in Grand Chamber of Strasbourg court refusing to have such an investigation into Russian interference ??
It's better than anything I have seen from the UK government but it is not nearly enough. Western European Air forces (plus Poland and the Baltics) could give Ukraine total air superiority over all of Ukraine tomorrow. The war could only go one way from there. The time to act, and to make Trump an irrelevant bystander, is now.
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Agreed.
This is what Trump is actually trying to do, based on his own words:
"The more cooks in the kitchen." Right. When you strip away the sheer nonsense of this plan, and get beyond the panic now gripping Europe and D.C., you realize what is being demanded by people with no background in diplomacy and no relationships with Western partners is this: Settling a 10 year war, re-litigating 30+ years of security architecture in Europe, deciding the permanent composition NATO, deciding how the EU will use and spend other people's frozen money -- with no Congressional oversight, no NATO consensus, and no official Russian buy-in on any of the foregoing. All done and dusted before the tryptophan kicks in on Thursday. Easy-peasy. https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1992242888084746422
It's just unserious bollocks; the whim of a semi senile aberration.
There is no negotiating with that.
It is long part time for Europe to say what it wants as a settlement of the war in Ukraine.
Logo: a sausage on a stick Conference anthem: Forever and Ever Slogan: Are you alright there, Ange?
Transport: Rolls Royce Silver Shadow, with brown dralon seat covers.
If I recall correctly Abigail and her husband mention in conversation that they have upgraded their car from a Mini to an Escort. Today a MkI or II Escort would be of a substantially higher value than a Silver Shadow, with or without dralon seat covers. I suspect Abigail would approve.
Not Abigail, Pete, it was the ghastly Beverly.
Now you mention it Abigail's husband still had a Mini.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
I always perceived Abigail as a downmarket (say, Penge vs Surbiton) version of Margot Ledbetter.
Beverley!
Yes. I associated Alison Steadman with Abigail. Of course she is not Abigail, my bad!
It's better than anything I have seen from the UK government but it is not nearly enough. Western European Air forces (plus Poland and the Baltics) could give Ukraine total air superiority over all of Ukraine tomorrow. The war could only go one way from there. The time to act, and to make Trump an irrelevant bystander, is now.
Indeed.
Somebody I respect a lot has made the suggestion that we should speak to the Norwegians and then tell Trump he will will next year's Nobel Peace Prize if he continues to back Ukraine for the rest of his presidency.
What a pathetic contribution from Ed Davey. If this is a "once-in-a-generation threat" then calling for Russia to be removed from the G20 is a totally inadequate response.
Putin's ambitions to conquer Ukraine and recreate the Russian Empire pose a once-in-a-generation threat to the whole of Europe. We cannot allow Trump to reward his aggression.
The Prime Minister must use this opportunity to call for Russia to be removed from the G20.
So far this evening we have called two party leader traitors out on PB. The only patriot left by the time the clock strikes midnight will be Farage.
Just for william, who might be a bit slow on the uptake.
Ukraine is on the brink of an historic betrayal by Trump to Putin.
‘Russian links to Reform need investigating’, he says. So why is his government still fighting case now in Grand Chamber of Strasbourg court refusing to have such an investigation into Russian interference ??
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Agreed.
This is what Trump is actually trying to do, based on his own words:
"The more cooks in the kitchen." Right. When you strip away the sheer nonsense of this plan, and get beyond the panic now gripping Europe and D.C., you realize what is being demanded by people with no background in diplomacy and no relationships with Western partners is this: Settling a 10 year war, re-litigating 30+ years of security architecture in Europe, deciding the permanent composition NATO, deciding how the EU will use and spend other people's frozen money -- with no Congressional oversight, no NATO consensus, and no official Russian buy-in on any of the foregoing. All done and dusted before the tryptophan kicks in on Thursday. Easy-peasy. https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1992242888084746422
It's just unserious bollocks; the whim of a semi senile aberration.
There is no negotiating with that.
It is long part time for Europe to say what it wants as a settlement of the war in Ukraine.
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Agreed.
This is what Trump is actually trying to do, based on his own words:
"The more cooks in the kitchen." Right. When you strip away the sheer nonsense of this plan, and get beyond the panic now gripping Europe and D.C., you realize what is being demanded by people with no background in diplomacy and no relationships with Western partners is this: Settling a 10 year war, re-litigating 30+ years of security architecture in Europe, deciding the permanent composition NATO, deciding how the EU will use and spend other people's frozen money -- with no Congressional oversight, no NATO consensus, and no official Russian buy-in on any of the foregoing. All done and dusted before the tryptophan kicks in on Thursday. Easy-peasy. https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1992242888084746422
It's just unserious bollocks; the whim of a semi senile aberration.
There is no negotiating with that.
It is long part time for Europe to say what it wants as a settlement of the war in Ukraine.
Only semi-senile?
Unless you mean Witkoff.
Need your assistance.
Was Postmaster-General a cabinet position in 1968/69?
I am trying to compile a list of post WWII cabinet ministers who have ended up in prison, so far I've got Jonathan Aitken and Chris Huhne, and potentially John Stonehouse.
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Agreed.
This is what Trump is actually trying to do, based on his own words:
"The more cooks in the kitchen." Right. When you strip away the sheer nonsense of this plan, and get beyond the panic now gripping Europe and D.C., you realize what is being demanded by people with no background in diplomacy and no relationships with Western partners is this: Settling a 10 year war, re-litigating 30+ years of security architecture in Europe, deciding the permanent composition NATO, deciding how the EU will use and spend other people's frozen money -- with no Congressional oversight, no NATO consensus, and no official Russian buy-in on any of the foregoing. All done and dusted before the tryptophan kicks in on Thursday. Easy-peasy. https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1992242888084746422
It's just unserious bollocks; the whim of a semi senile aberration.
There is no negotiating with that.
It is long part time for Europe to say what it wants as a settlement of the war in Ukraine.
When will British (and European and Canadian) politicians learn?
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
Yes, stop the pandering, I'd love to see that, but can we answer "yes" to the million dollar question that lies at the heart of all this - if the US walk away can European nations (politically, militarily, financially) provide Ukraine with enough support to keep fighting Russia until all or most of their territory is reclaimed?
Yes, of course we can.
Not without cutting welfare and pensions. Until European countries are willing to stop paying the lazy to be unemployed then there's no money to replace the US.
"Twitter makes user locations public. Users immediately discover many high-traffic MAGA accounts are astroturfing offshore accounts located in the Third World pretending to be American. Twitter turns off the feature within hours. "
It's better than anything I have seen from the UK government but it is not nearly enough. Western European Air forces (plus Poland and the Baltics) could give Ukraine total air superiority over all of Ukraine tomorrow. The war could only go one way from there. The time to act, and to make Trump an irrelevant bystander, is now.
Indeed.
Somebody I respect a lot has made the suggestion that we should speak to the Norwegians and then tell Trump he will will next year's Nobel Peace Prize if he continues to back Ukraine for the rest of his presidency.
Which rather speaks volumes for how low and absurd things have become.
Comments
'Europe rejects Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine'
That seems a pretty fair summary of what has happened this afternoon when you cut through the very necessary diplomatic language.
It was not meant to be misleading but as I heard it but if I am wrong then I apologise
I am always ready to apologise when necessary
Of course practically doing this without the US woild be more difficult. Less so without Hungary.
@lewisgoodall.com
Was a true pleasure to go to Nottingham to interview Ken Clarke, truly the archetypal big political beast.
https://bsky.app/profile/lewisgoodall.com/post/3m67tqbbqh22b
Without that there isn't much of enough significance that any one country can do on its own.
Almost as if taxing property might level things up a bit, and make housing more affordable for first-time buyers. Oh no.
I've heard from a local estate agent friend a number of buyers have pulled out of deals because of concerns over what the Budget might do to house prices. In this part of East London, however, the market and expecially the rental markets, still seems to be active.
I don't have much sympathy for those with massive unearned wealth simply because they held onto property in the capital and other rich cities. They haven't made the kind of significant innovation or contribution to the economy that deserves such prosperity. I count myself among them based on how quickly my flat has increased in value over the last 6 years.
One is that even respectable news outlets like Sky are prone to the sort of sensation-mongering that used to be the preserve of tabloids and the worst sort of blog writers. You know the kind of guy I mean.
The other is that we've all forgotten the lesson of Operation Bodyguard- truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies. Churchill said it about wartime, but there are peacetime situations where it's true also. Permanews means that we are bombarded with soundbites, and we naively assume that those soundbites represent the truth or what the speaker really thinks. Sometimes they are just what the speaker has to say to prevent all hell breaking loose.
It doesn't hope that, because we're all human, we tend to look for quotes that support what we already believe, and reasons to play down quotes that contradict those beliefs. As the sterotypical sermon goes, "I know I do".
Cognitive dissonance seems to be the order of the day in the governments of Europe. Trump is just like another ordinary politician who can be negoitated with. Not only that, but he's a bit sensitive, so we must avoid any actual -you know- disagreeing with him. If we just push here, and look for a concession there, it will all be fine.
No.
It will not be fine.
It's a recipe for disaster.
One of Trump's greatest skills (and one is a fool if one does not recognize his abilities) is anchoring. Put a positiion down, and people will negotiate from there.
The only way to deal with someone so adept at anchoring is not to play at that game: we're not negotiating from there. Come back with something else, or we're not playing.
There is this massive fear that Trump will wave the tariff hammer, and wack those who get out of line. And you know what, that's partly true. But the more you stick together, the more that hammer is the US hammering its own consumers with ever higher prices. Trump is already unpopular. And concerns about the cost of living in the US already top voters concerns. So stand tall.
The only thing Trump respects is strength. And the more people stand up to him, the harder it is for him to bully others.
On Ukraine, and on other things, the only thing to say is "we're not responding to threats, treat us with the same respect you demand".
They have multiple metric tons of plutonium in the cooling ponds at the nuclear power stations.
It’s in expended fuel rods - dissolve and precipitate the plutonium. It’s simple chemistry,
The plutonium is so called Civil Plutonium - lots of Pu-240 mixed in with Pu-239.
Well should be*
Anyway, the 240 comes from running at high power to generate ‘leccy.
Supposedly anything at 20% 240 is not Bomb Grade.
But in the 1960s, the US detonated a bomb made with 25% Pu-240 - bought from the UK, only enough.
Pu-240 is a pain in the arse for a bomb designer - but it’s still usable.
A two stage all fission design would work and yield 100kt plus.
I’d expect a flying plate implosion system - unless they went full modern and went for crushing weird shapes to spheres…
Why do you think Putin & Co have been demanding control of all nuclear power stations in Ukraine?
*the traditional method to make bomb grade plutonium is to put it in a reactor run at lower neutron flux (less power). And/Or less time on he reactor. The safeguard people try to watch for this, but in war torn Ukraine, unloading some fuel rods early might have been possible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6PHz7qvw9U
Issue is that any stop now will just give Russia a few years to rearm before they start again...
This means an apparent drop in price.
But what that in turn means, given the ongoing shortage of housing, is that cash buyers are taking more and more of the top of the market.
So house prices may decline, a bit. But don’t worry. You won’t be able to get a mortgage to buy them, even at the reduced price.
I can't see him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvI4u0jrZcA
People up there are big and bad enough to take the slings and arrows.
So they lose a slice of their unearned, untaxed froth. So what?
Because their competitors won’t be able to get mortgages.
But don’t worry, the people with pikes of cash will buy for less. The people who can’t get mortgages can rent from them…
Summation - we need 8 million more properties. That will fix the housing market for everyone.
Bought our 4 bed home in 1976 for £16,000 and is now worth in excess of £500,000
Clarke seems to be wearing pretty well, but I was struck by the threadbare nature of his Starmer/Reeves critique. His criticisms were mostly about presentation and political management (though he did attack Reeves for refusing to cut spending - correctly imo).
Antony Seldon, another centrist 'grandee' was even worse on his book promotion interviews. His attack was mainly that Starmer shouldn't have sacked Sue Gray or dared to rebuke Chris Wormald. In other words that his lack of success is because he isn't enough of a creature of the establishment.
Neither had anything to say about or any solutions to the UK's deeper issues - the difficulties of building, investing, starting or running a business. Public sector underperformance. Centrism is an empty vessel these days. It has been found out.
As house prices fall from a genuine increase in supply, rents will fall as well.
Why try and corner a market to get smaller and smaller returns, by investing in a depreciating asset?
Multinational and 128 arrests in the UK so far.
The NCA have identified that a billion-dollar money laundering network active in the UK purchased a bank in Kyrgyzstan to facilitate sanctions evasion and payments in support of Russian military efforts.
Through Operation Destabilise, the NCA and its partners are targeting money launderers who work for this network and are known to operate in at least 28 UK cities and towns.
For a fee, the launderers collect ‘dirty’ cash generated from the drugs trade, firearms supply, and organised immigration crime, and convert it to ‘clean’ cryptocurrency.
These ‘cash to crypto’ swaps are an integral part of a global criminal ecosystem that spans offending in our communities, sanctions evasions and the highest levels of organised crime, including providing money laundering services to the Russian state.
https://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/news/operation-destabilise-nca-exposes-billion-dollar-money-laundering-network-that-purchased-bank-to-fund-russian-war-effort
But we’re close to the point that they have to.
https://x.com/EdwardJDavey/status/1992148569533374474
Putin's ambitions to conquer Ukraine and recreate the Russian Empire pose a once-in-a-generation threat to the whole of Europe. We cannot allow Trump to reward his aggression.
The Prime Minister must use this opportunity to call for Russia to be removed from the G20.
If the Ukraine clock ticks on for another four years a Reform Britain might be joining a third term Trump administration USA off the pitch, showered and already on the bus home.
P.S. Where else can one discuss Starmer's traitorous capitulation to Putin and Abigail's Party on the same page?
And is no excuse for not fixing the market.
Breaking it would be extremely expensive for US defence companies.
And if the Europeans were determined to support Ukraine, then given such support was almost certainly result in victory for Ukraine and for the fall of Putin, then Trump has to make a very difficult choice: total isolation (with all the downsides for US companies that currently sit astride the world), or pretend that he always backed Europe and Ukraine.
8 millions dwellings is just under two and a half Londons.
(And a reminder to people who own lots of cypto, and didn't buy it early, if there's lots of regulation, then what's its utility?)
I just realised my comment reads that Starmer and other European leaders would be forced into "that choice", ie America over Ukraine. when I meant they would be forced into making a choice between the two. Sadly I suspect they would choose America.
But well done for the bit of party politics.
Sheerwater may have some pockets of deprivation but it still has an average house price higher than the average for all of Essex, let alone areas like Harlow, Basildon and Clacton and Southend
It's a choice between cooperating with a rogue president, who is massively unpopular in his own county, in the selling out of Europe's future security, and saying NO.
It would be an uncomfortable choice to say no, but not a disastrous one like the alternative.
And the US might eventually be grateful to us for it.
Avec nos partenaires européens et du G7, nous saluons les efforts des États-Unis pour ramener la paix en Ukraine.
Cela montre une chose : tout le monde veut la paix, sauf la Russie qui continue obstinément de bombarder l’Ukraine.
Le projet en 28 points doit être renforcé : aucune frontière ne doit être modifiée par la force et l’Ukraine ne doit jamais être vulnérable.
Toute décision impliquant l’Union européenne ou l’OTAN doit recueillir l’assentiment de leurs membres.
Nous continuerons de nous coordonner étroitement avec Kyiv et Washington.
Notre soutien collectif à l’Ukraine est décisif. La sécurité et la liberté de toute l’Europe sont en jeu.
https://x.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1992306654659154034
It is the best thing the BBC has done in its history.
This is outrageous from @Keir_Starmer.
‘Russian links to Reform need investigating’, he says. So why is his government still fighting case now in Grand Chamber of Strasbourg court refusing to have such an investigation into Russian interference ??
https://x.com/carolecadwalla/status/1992152267945091394?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
It was better best forgotten.
The cash buyer and inequality feeds off a broken market.
Supply will never exceed demand. The builders will not build homes they cannot sell.
And it’s worse than that. First time buyers are in rented property where rent is tending to the unaffordable.
For that reason the average first time buyer is now in their late 30s due to the size of the required deposit.
So it’s clear that the rent being charged keeps down the number of buyers available. ( I bet most people on pb bought in their 20s )
And wealth from rents creates cash buyers.
8m homes aren’t going to happen while the system makes the rich richer and keeps the poor poor.
All the while the government supports rents, and keeps prices high by subsidising a small number of first time buyers into the market.
A very nasty system.
It's just I can't remember the guy who said pretty much word for word what Nathan Gill said in the European Parliament and went down for.
My memory is shot away!
This is what Trump is actually trying to do, based on his own words:
"The more cooks in the kitchen." Right. When you strip away the sheer nonsense of this plan, and get beyond the panic now gripping Europe and D.C., you realize what is being demanded by people with no background in diplomacy and no relationships with Western partners is this: Settling a 10 year war, re-litigating 30+ years of security architecture in Europe, deciding the permanent composition NATO, deciding how the EU will use and spend other people's frozen money -- with no Congressional oversight, no NATO consensus, and no official Russian buy-in on any of the foregoing. All done and dusted before the tryptophan kicks in on Thursday. Easy-peasy.
https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1992242888084746422
It's just unserious bollocks; the whim of a semi senile aberration.
There is no negotiating with that.
It is long part time for Europe to say what it wants as a settlement of the war in Ukraine.
With our European partners and G7 members, we welcome the United States' efforts to bring peace to Ukraine.
This shows one thing: everyone wants peace, except for Russia, which obstinately continues to bombard Ukraine.
The 28-point plan must be strengthened: no border must be altered by force, and Ukraine must never be vulnerable.
Any decision involving the European Union or NATO must receive the assent of their members.
We will continue to coordinate closely with Kyiv and Washington.
Our collective support for Ukraine is decisive. The security and freedom of all of Europe are at stake.
Somebody I respect a lot has made the suggestion that we should speak to the Norwegians and then tell Trump he will will next year's Nobel Peace Prize if he continues to back Ukraine for the rest of his presidency.
Ukraine is on the brink of an historic betrayal by Trump to Putin.
Keir Starmer must bring our European allies together to back Zelensky, starting by seizing frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine.
https://x.com/EdwardJDavey/status/1991918688467833286
Unless you mean Witkoff.
Was Postmaster-General a cabinet position in 1968/69?
I am trying to compile a list of post WWII cabinet ministers who have ended up in prison, so far I've got Jonathan Aitken and Chris Huhne, and potentially John Stonehouse.
Any others?
Wtf is wrong with these people ?