For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
Having not been about for a few hours and assuming that Starmer whipped his MPs into supporting him.. I hope this disgraceful act will end with MPs getting their own back on Starmer. Each leak will further diminish what authority he may have left.
False precision is rife in this debate, as Fishing says, but one thing we can say for sure about Brexit is that people who voted for it on the grounds it would help the economy are still waiting for some decent evidence of it. The consensus is if anything the opposite. Ditto that it would make us stronger and more influential in the world. The opposite has transpired there too. Same on immigration. Far from taking the heat out of that it's become an even more contentious issue.
Which leaves the sovereignty angle. That the point of Brexit was Brexit itself. It's a success by dint of having happened. For better or worse - with most metrics thus far indicating worse - we have taken back control. Forget all the rest, it is argued, this is the Brexit benefit. Pretty much the only one but nevertheless potentially big enough to justify almost a decade of division, paralysis and distraction.
So what I'd like to ask Leave voters, given the importance of this, is do they feel it? Do they feel more sovereign now we aren't in the EU? Is the supposed Brexit dividend of being more in control something real and tangible to them? But wait, we don't have to ask them because the polls tell us the answer. Many of them now think it was a mistake and most of those who don't remain so hacked off they want to hand power to Nigel Farage and his bunch of chancers, fantasists and unsavouries. All in all, it's not a good report card.
Dan Hannan's ludicrous article with his fantasy of life after Brexit springs to mind. That's what Brexiteers promised.
Some in this thread suggest that the overall effect of Brexit on the economy, and perhaps more generally, was fairly minor. Maybe that's correct, but had that been the prospectus offered, would people have voted for Brexit? No.
I remember that. Bit of a pipedream. Fwiw I can accept (without agreeing with) a pov that the economic impact is marginal. It's impossible to prove that stuff because so many things impact the economy.
It's the 'sovereignty' argument that interests me more. I mean, technically, yes of course we have more now since less is pooled. But that for me is a reductive, superficial view of what sovereignty means.
I'd rather pose a couple of practical questions. As a consequence of Brexit is Britain more influential in the world? As a consequence of Brexit do the people of Britain have more control over their lives? It's hard to answer yes to either.
So what was it all for other than to gratify and empower a crew of reactionary right wing ideologues plus Boris Johnson? Answers on a postcard.
Broadly I would say Brexit has two upsides and four downsides for the UK.
Upsides: 1. Flexibility. The EU takes forever to come to decision. The UK can be more nimble, eg Covid vaccines. 2. Greater accountability due to decisions being made closer to those affected by them.
Downsides: 1. Stresses the integrity of the United Kingdom. I think Northern Ireland is probably gone long term. Scotland less certain but Brexit doesn't help. Both nations voted Remain for good reasons. If you are an English, Irish or Scottish nationalist you obviously don't care about the existence of the United Kingdom, but it is the country we live in. 2. Loss of personal freedom and liberty, particularly to trade and go where you want This aim is incompatible with greater government control afforded by Brexit, eg on immigration. Some people prefer government control to liberty, which is why I haven't put that as an upside. Mileages may vary on this. 3. Economic loss - the subject of this series of headers 4. Loss of influence. This a lot more hard nosed than people think. It means getting more of what we want as a nation.
I do think the European Union is a net force for the good, so I am glad it exists, regardless of UK membership. Talking here about how Brexit affects the UK specifically.
The loss of influence argument works more in theory than in practice.
In theory we're no longer at the top table in Europe; in practice, it's the E3 states of Britain, France and Germany setting out a position on Iran and Britain has obviously been very influential over the course of events in Ukraine (more so than post-2014).
I would say the loss of influence through Brexit is real and of greater consequence than people think. Nevertheless it's a side effect of leaving rather than a reason to stay in the EU per se. Inhabitants of smaller countries don't spend a lot of time worrying their country has less influence than bigger countries.
As a Leaver I agree with this. We have obviously lost diplomatic and geopolitical clout by quitting the EU. One needs to be honest
On the upside we have gained important freedoms that we haven’t even tried to exploit (and Remainers seldom recognise this). It needs a proper right wing government with a clever leadership and some tungsten cullions to do that
Clearly, sadly, we could be waiting a long time
So Brexit only makes sense if accompanied by a very right wing government. That does explain a few things.
Well yes. If you are going to generate hassle in order to have the freedom to do things differently to our neighbours, you need to do things differently, or what's the point?
That the things that would justify the hassle are things that most Britons don't particularly want to do is part of why we are where we are.
Yep. It facilitates extremes of left and right, neither of which has popular support. Bizarre situation.
Everything about where we are now as a country is so stupid.
One thing is indisputable; Charles is a better orator than Starmer.
I should hope so, it's a big part of his job - delivering bland stuff in a rousing fashion should be a core royal skill, considering they cannot generally say controversial things.
Rather a lot of what he said was highly controversial in the context of current US politics (limits on executive power; environmentalism; support for Ukraine etc). He just delivered it in a manner sufficiently emollient to charm everyone but Vance.
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
A largeish difference wouldn't have surprised me; but this is massive.
Amazing to see King Charles unify Congress in a way America craves. Great speech on our historic relationship, our democratic values, and our belief in freedom. 🇺🇸🇬🇧
Don't know whether to be hopeful, amused or disgusted by the futility.
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
Great tip on Peterborough vs Mansfield earlier. Still 0-0 with a couple mins to go. I chickened out at 71 mins for a decent profit, but would be double that now…
One thing is indisputable; Charles is a better orator than Starmer.
I should hope so, it's a big part of his job - delivering bland stuff in a rousing fashion should be a core royal skill, considering they cannot generally say controversial things.
Rather a lot of what he said was highly controversial in the context of current US politics (limits on executive power; environmentalism; support for Ukraine etc). He just delivered it in a manner sufficiently emollient to charm everyone but Vance.
Beautifully done. But all you have to do in USA today to be highly polarised and politicised is read out a few lines of the American constitution and declaration of independence, and go down memory lane with a few well won cliches about WWII and standing shoulder to shoulder.
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
Don't know whether to be hopeful, amused or disgusted by the futility.
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
They'd say it was not a victory, but it wouldn't get reported on Fox?
I don't think you can get that much from a diplomatic visit, but the best hope we could have is that Charles manages to butter Trump up at dinner and it puts him in a sufficiently good mood that he stops condemning us for a month or two.
The name being taken from an Ayn Rand character might have been a clue ?
Meet Roark Aerospace - the company that claims to be the UK's first defence unicorn.
No verified investors. No known customers. No public users.
Journalists have been unable to locate any employees, customers, users, investors, or industry experts that can vouch for it.
Early this year Patton French, the CEO and Founder of @roark_aerospace , sent round a press release stating that his company, which makes anti-drone systems, had closed a $210m Series B at a valuation of $1.6 billion.
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
Having said that, women definitely have a lower tolerance for risk. The moment you install decent protected cycle infrastructure you get a 1:1 gender balance. Before, more like 4:1 for men.
It’s why it’s the most important indicator, followed by the proportion not wearing helmets.
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
How do you vote on this if you're in theory in favour of nuclear but at S Korean not British project cost ?
'America has special relationship with Israel now, UK’s new US ambassador says Diplomat described Keir Starmer as being ‘on the ropes’ over Peter Mandelson scandal in private meeting with students'
I don't think you can get that much from a diplomatic visit, but the best hope we could have is that Charles manages to butter Trump up at dinner and it puts him in a sufficiently good mood that he stops condemning us for a month or two.
Trump's attention span isn't that long. I think the value in the visit is to maintain the relationship with the rest of the US, so that when Trump is gone there's a better chance of repairing the damage he has done.
The message is something like, "we still want to be friends once you've got this Trump madness out of your system, and, sure, every country that's old enough makes mistakes. We've been there."
False precision is rife in this debate, as Fishing says, but one thing we can say for sure about Brexit is that people who voted for it on the grounds it would help the economy are still waiting for some decent evidence of it. The consensus is if anything the opposite. Ditto that it would make us stronger and more influential in the world. The opposite has transpired there too. Same on immigration. Far from taking the heat out of that it's become an even more contentious issue.
Which leaves the sovereignty angle. That the point of Brexit was Brexit itself. It's a success by dint of having happened. For better or worse - with most metrics thus far indicating worse - we have taken back control. Forget all the rest, it is argued, this is the Brexit benefit. Pretty much the only one but nevertheless potentially big enough to justify almost a decade of division, paralysis and distraction.
So what I'd like to ask Leave voters, given the importance of this, is do they feel it? Do they feel more sovereign now we aren't in the EU? Is the supposed Brexit dividend of being more in control something real and tangible to them? But wait, we don't have to ask them because the polls tell us the answer. Many of them now think it was a mistake and most of those who don't remain so hacked off they want to hand power to Nigel Farage and his bunch of chancers, fantasists and unsavouries. All in all, it's not a good report card.
Dan Hannan's ludicrous article with his fantasy of life after Brexit springs to mind. That's what Brexiteers promised.
Some in this thread suggest that the overall effect of Brexit on the economy, and perhaps more generally, was fairly minor. Maybe that's correct, but had that been the prospectus offered, would people have voted for Brexit? No.
I remember that. Bit of a pipedream. Fwiw I can accept (without agreeing with) a pov that the economic impact is marginal. It's impossible to prove that stuff because so many things impact the economy.
It's the 'sovereignty' argument that interests me more. I mean, technically, yes of course we have more now since less is pooled. But that for me is a reductive, superficial view of what sovereignty means.
I'd rather pose a couple of practical questions. As a consequence of Brexit is Britain more influential in the world? As a consequence of Brexit do the people of Britain have more control over their lives? It's hard to answer yes to either.
So what was it all for other than to gratify and empower a crew of reactionary right wing ideologues plus Boris Johnson? Answers on a postcard.
Broadly I would say Brexit has two upsides and four downsides for the UK.
Upsides: 1. Flexibility. The EU takes forever to come to decision. The UK can be more nimble, eg Covid vaccines. 2. Greater accountability due to decisions being made closer to those affected by them.
Downsides: 1. Stresses the integrity of the United Kingdom. I think Northern Ireland is probably gone long term. Scotland less certain but Brexit doesn't help. Both nations voted Remain for good reasons. If you are an English, Irish or Scottish nationalist you obviously don't care about the existence of the United Kingdom, but it is the country we live in. 2. Loss of personal freedom and liberty, particularly to trade and go where you want This aim is incompatible with greater government control afforded by Brexit, eg on immigration. Some people prefer government control to liberty, which is why I haven't put that as an upside. Mileages may vary on this. 3. Economic loss - the subject of this series of headers 4. Loss of influence. This a lot more hard nosed than people think. It means getting more of what we want as a nation.
I do think the European Union is a net force for the good, so I am glad it exists, regardless of UK membership. Talking here about how Brexit affects the UK specifically.
Our independent approach on COVID vaccines was allowed under the EU rules.
Actually no. The EU tried to prevent countries from starting their vaccination campaigns independently because they wanted a single unified EU operation. They were late in authorising vaccines and were almost 3 months later than the UK in ordering vaccines.
One reason the UK vaccines rollout was far more successful is that we embedded the certifying authorities into the testing process rather than waiting until the process was completed before starting certification as the EU did.
Our vaccine approach was allowed under EU rules. It was not encouraged. But it was allowed..
Don't know whether to be hopeful, amused or disgusted by the futility.
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
Good evening all. I watched the STV leaders debate so that you didn’t have to. Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies. Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly. Ratings: 1st - Ross Greer (Green) 2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform) then a gap to 3rd - John Swinney (SNP) 4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour) 4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem) then a bigger gap to 6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday. 2 hours of my life I will never get back.
Good evening all. I watched the STV leaders debate so that you didn’t have to. Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies. Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly. Ratings: 1st - Ross Greer (Green) 2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform) then a gap to 3rd - John Swinney (SNP) 4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour) 4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem) then a bigger gap to 6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday. 2 hours of my life I will never get back.
Don't know whether to be hopeful, amused or disgusted by the futility.
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
They'd say it was not a victory, but it wouldn't get reported on Fox?
Iran hard liners would be ecstatic I think? Keep nuke materials; keep control of Straits and start charging to use; regime in place and hardened by loss of the old guy; America taught that it can't win a military victory etc etc etc
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
How do you vote on this if you're in theory in favour of nuclear but at S Korean not British project cost ?
Don't know whether to be hopeful, amused or disgusted by the futility.
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
All three. With emphasis for now on the hope since of all realistic outcomes that one is the best.
Good evening all. I watched the STV leaders debate so that you didn’t have to. Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies. Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly. Ratings: 1st - Ross Greer (Green) 2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform) then a gap to 3rd - John Swinney (SNP) 4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour) 4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem) then a bigger gap to 6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday. 2 hours of my life I will never get back.
'America has special relationship with Israel now, UK’s new US ambassador says Diplomat described Keir Starmer as being ‘on the ropes’ over Peter Mandelson scandal in private meeting with students'
Don't know whether to be hopeful, amused or disgusted by the futility.
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
All three. With emphasis for now on the hope since of all realistic outcomes that one is the best.
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
False precision is rife in this debate, as Fishing says, but one thing we can say for sure about Brexit is that people who voted for it on the grounds it would help the economy are still waiting for some decent evidence of it. The consensus is if anything the opposite. Ditto that it would make us stronger and more influential in the world. The opposite has transpired there too. Same on immigration. Far from taking the heat out of that it's become an even more contentious issue.
Which leaves the sovereignty angle. That the point of Brexit was Brexit itself. It's a success by dint of having happened. For better or worse - with most metrics thus far indicating worse - we have taken back control. Forget all the rest, it is argued, this is the Brexit benefit. Pretty much the only one but nevertheless potentially big enough to justify almost a decade of division, paralysis and distraction.
So what I'd like to ask Leave voters, given the importance of this, is do they feel it? Do they feel more sovereign now we aren't in the EU? Is the supposed Brexit dividend of being more in control something real and tangible to them? But wait, we don't have to ask them because the polls tell us the answer. Many of them now think it was a mistake and most of those who don't remain so hacked off they want to hand power to Nigel Farage and his bunch of chancers, fantasists and unsavouries. All in all, it's not a good report card.
Dan Hannan's ludicrous article with his fantasy of life after Brexit springs to mind. That's what Brexiteers promised.
Some in this thread suggest that the overall effect of Brexit on the economy, and perhaps more generally, was fairly minor. Maybe that's correct, but had that been the prospectus offered, would people have voted for Brexit? No.
I remember that. Bit of a pipedream. Fwiw I can accept (without agreeing with) a pov that the economic impact is marginal. It's impossible to prove that stuff because so many things impact the economy.
It's the 'sovereignty' argument that interests me more. I mean, technically, yes of course we have more now since less is pooled. But that for me is a reductive, superficial view of what sovereignty means.
I'd rather pose a couple of practical questions. As a consequence of Brexit is Britain more influential in the world? As a consequence of Brexit do the people of Britain have more control over their lives? It's hard to answer yes to either.
So what was it all for other than to gratify and empower a crew of reactionary right wing ideologues plus Boris Johnson? Answers on a postcard.
Broadly I would say Brexit has two upsides and four downsides for the UK.
Upsides: 1. Flexibility. The EU takes forever to come to decision. The UK can be more nimble, eg Covid vaccines. 2. Greater accountability due to decisions being made closer to those affected by them.
Downsides: 1. Stresses the integrity of the United Kingdom. I think Northern Ireland is probably gone long term. Scotland less certain but Brexit doesn't help. Both nations voted Remain for good reasons. If you are an English, Irish or Scottish nationalist you obviously don't care about the existence of the United Kingdom, but it is the country we live in. 2. Loss of personal freedom and liberty, particularly to trade and go where you want This aim is incompatible with greater government control afforded by Brexit, eg on immigration. Some people prefer government control to liberty, which is why I haven't put that as an upside. Mileages may vary on this. 3. Economic loss - the subject of this series of headers 4. Loss of influence. This a lot more hard nosed than people think. It means getting more of what we want as a nation.
I do think the European Union is a net force for the good, so I am glad it exists, regardless of UK membership. Talking here about how Brexit affects the UK specifically.
The loss of influence argument works more in theory than in practice.
In theory we're no longer at the top table in Europe; in practice, it's the E3 states of Britain, France and Germany setting out a position on Iran and Britain has obviously been very influential over the course of events in Ukraine (more so than post-2014).
I would say the loss of influence through Brexit is real and of greater consequence than people think. Nevertheless it's a side effect of leaving rather than a reason to stay in the EU per se. Inhabitants of smaller countries don't spend a lot of time worrying their country has less influence than bigger countries.
As a Leaver I agree with this. We have obviously lost diplomatic and geopolitical clout by quitting the EU. One needs to be honest
On the upside we have gained important freedoms that we haven’t even tried to exploit (and Remainers seldom recognise this). It needs a proper right wing government with a clever leadership and some tungsten cullions to do that
Clearly, sadly, we could be waiting a long time
We have lost diplomatical and geopolitical clout (if that is such a thing to be longed for) because after nearly 30 years of a New Labour agenda we're a bit shit.
Good evening all. I watched the STV leaders debate so that you didn’t have to. Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies. Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly. Ratings: 1st - Ross Greer (Green) 2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform) then a gap to 3rd - John Swinney (SNP) 4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour) 4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem) then a bigger gap to 6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday. 2 hours of my life I will never get back.
Thank you for your service. I can't imagine listening to any of those deeply uninspiring individuals for more than 30 seconds without chewing my own leg off in despair.
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
Housing or Exchequer?
In a bizarre misunderstanding, Starmer has offered Rayner an Ikea cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup.
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
So now you're down on nuclear too? Is it just anything that stands a chance of providing predictable energy at a moderately affordable price? Let them eat windmills.
'America has special relationship with Israel now, UK’s new US ambassador says Diplomat described Keir Starmer as being ‘on the ropes’ over Peter Mandelson scandal in private meeting with students'
Good evening all. I watched the STV leaders debate so that you didn’t have to. Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies. Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly. Ratings: 1st - Ross Greer (Green) 2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform) then a gap to 3rd - John Swinney (SNP) 4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour) 4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem) then a bigger gap to 6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday. 2 hours of my life I will never get back.
Thank you for your service. I can't imagine listening to any of those deeply uninspiring individuals for more than 30 seconds without chewing my own leg off in despair.
I was going to chew my leg off, but fortunately I remembered I had the dogs to walk before bedtime.
Good evening all. I watched the STV leaders debate so that you didn’t have to. Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies. Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly. Ratings: 1st - Ross Greer (Green) 2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform) then a gap to 3rd - John Swinney (SNP) 4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour) 4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem) then a bigger gap to 6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday. 2 hours of my life I will never get back.
Thank you for your service. I can't imagine listening to any of those deeply uninspiring individuals for more than 30 seconds without chewing my own leg off in despair.
I was going to chew my leg off, but fortunately I remembered I had the dogs to walk before bedtime. Edit: vanilla still being useless. Thank f*ck the debate wasn’t duplicated.
Those who remember the book/film/TV series "The Handmaids Tale" will recall the the titular Handmaids are renamed to "Of"+"name of owner". I can't stop thinking that whenever Malcolm Offord speaks, there's a guy called "Ford" in the wings waiting to take him home before he escapes to Canada.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
I’ve been in Sunderland today ahead of local elections. To say Labour is facing an absolute bloodbath in a city that has been Red since 1974 doesn’t do it justice. The local elections are just the start; Bridget Phillipson will lose Houghton and Sunderland South. But it’s not rage that I picked up on. More an ice-cold disdain. And a resolve that felt almost eerie. After decades of being taken for granted, voters aren’t after revenge. They seek liquidation. While the Mandelson saga hasn’t particularly cut through, Starmer’s name is mud. Words I heard today: “arrogant”, “fake”, “snake”, “a total gobshite”. An extinction-level event is brewing in the North East.
Big applause for the King in his address to the Congress as he cites the citing of Magna Carta rights on curbing executive power in the Bill of Rights and US Constitution
The Founding Fathers were bold and imaginative rebels with a cause. 250 years ago (or, as we say in the United Kingdom, just the other day….) they declared Independence. By balancing contending forces and drawing strength in diversity, they united thirteen disparate colonies to forge a Nation on the revolutionary idea of ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’. They carried with them, and carried forward, the great inheritance of the British Enlightenment – as well as the ideals which had an even deeper history in English Common Law and Magna Carta. These roots run deep, and they are still vital.
Our Declaration of Rights of 1689 was not only the foundation of our constitutional Monarchy, but also provided the source of so many of the principles reiterated – often verbatim – in the American Bill of Rights of 1791. And those roots go even further back in our history: the U.S. Supreme Court Historical Society has calculated that Magna Carta is cited in at least 160 Supreme Court cases since 1789, not least as the foundation of the principle that executive power is subject to checks and balances. This is the reason why there stands a stone, by the River Thames at Runnymede where Magna Carta was signed in the year 1215. This stone records that an acre of that ancient and historic site was given to the U.S.A. by the people of the United Kingdom, to symbolise our shared resolve in support of liberty, and in memory of President John F. Kennedy.
Not sure how wise it is to remind Trump that an acre of England is sovereign US territory...
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
So now you're down on nuclear too? Is it just anything that stands a chance of providing predictable energy at a moderately affordable price? Let them eat windmills.
What makes you think that?
This is a bit like the time you accused me of ramping for Chinese coal. You’ve gone a bit batty recently.
Don't know whether to be hopeful, amused or disgusted by the futility.
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
All three. With emphasis for now on the hope since of all realistic outcomes that one is the best.
World Cup getting closer - this will happen.
Yes that's the backstop. Leaves a window for some nonsense with Cuba between that and the midterms.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
You don't need a graph. All you need is the size of the houses in the sitcoms. Roseanne's house was huge.
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
So now you're down on nuclear too? Is it just anything that stands a chance of providing predictable energy at a moderately affordable price? Let them eat windmills.
The problem with nuclear is that it looks incredibly expensive when compared to natural gas, and nuclear plants have historically had lots of unscheduled maintenance meaning uptime is often worse than offshore wind.
The number of nuclear power plants built withouth government subsidy in the history of the world is currently zero.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
You don't need a graph. All you need is the size of the houses in the sitcoms. Roseanne's house was huge.
Yes, but. America is huge. Not surprising they have big houses.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
You don't need a graph. All you need is the size of the houses in the sitcoms. Roseanne's house was huge.
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
Has she been DVed yet?
She's been Blu-Rayed, just to be on the safe side.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
I'm going to disagree with Noah a bit. (And bear in mind this is a 2022 Substack.)
There is crushing poverty in the US, to a level that in incomprehensible to a Brit or to a Slovenian.
The old silver mining "towns", barely 90 minutes out of booming Denver, are little better than the favelas in Brazil. Falling apart trailers. No jobs. No education. Just opiods, crystal meth and welfare checks.
They make the worst parts of East London or Blackpool look like heaven.
I'm sure there are parts of rural Pennsylvania and West Virginia that are similarly dirt poor.
And if you go to Mississippi, you will see that it has a higher GDP that the UK. And you'll look at Jackson - the State Capital - and you'll say "wah...". Because it doesn't feel like that at all. It feels economically incredibly poor, with empty buildings and shops.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
You don't need a graph. All you need is the size of the houses in the sitcoms. Roseanne's house was huge.
Yes, but. America is huge. Not surprising they have big houses.
Manhattan and Hong Kong have tiny square foot per person... and yet they seem to be quite well off. (Ditto Singapore I suspect.)
Great tip on Peterborough vs Mansfield earlier. Still 0-0 with a couple mins to go. I chickened out at 71 mins for a decent profit, but would be double that now…
Thanks . Always a bit of value in correct score betting at very end of season
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
Good evening all. I watched the STV leaders debate so that you didn’t have to. Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies. Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly. Ratings: 1st - Ross Greer (Green) 2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform) then a gap to 3rd - John Swinney (SNP) 4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour) 4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem) then a bigger gap to 6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday. 2 hours of my life I will never get back.
Thank you for your service. I can't imagine listening to any of those deeply uninspiring individuals for more than 30 seconds without chewing my own leg off in despair.
I was going to chew my leg off, but fortunately I remembered I had the dogs to walk before bedtime.
I caught a bit of Ross Greer speaking on Politics Live today. A rather unimpressive fellow
Thought Morgan played a poor hand well. Talked about actual policies Plaid and Ref were at each other's throats and accused each other of racism Con didn't attack Ref and mainly attacked Lab LD was motherhood and apple pie and admitted they wouldn't win Green was ineffectual and not actually Welsh (reminded me of Leonard in Scotland)
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
I'm going to disagree with Noah a bit. (And bear in mind this is a 2022 Substack.)
There is crushing poverty in the US, to a level that in incomprehensible to a Brit or to a Slovenian.
The old silver mining "towns", barely 90 minutes out of booming Denver, are little better than the favelas in Brazil. Falling apart trailers. No jobs. No education. Just opiods, crystal meth and welfare checks.
They make the worst parts of East London or Blackpool look like heaven.
I'm sure there are parts of rural Pennsylvania and West Virginia that are similarly dirt poor.
And if you go to Mississippi, you will see that it has a higher GDP that the UK. And you'll look at Jackson - the State Capital - and you'll say "wah...". Because it doesn't feel like that at all. It feels economically incredibly poor, with empty buildings and shops.
To be fair Noah Smith does say 'We're a rich society with some very poor people' and there is a lot of poverty in the US. Yet as he points out the median American not just the richest Americans have higher incomes than any other developed nation except Switzerland and higher median disposable incomes than any nation except Luxembourg
False precision is rife in this debate, as Fishing says, but one thing we can say for sure about Brexit is that people who voted for it on the grounds it would help the economy are still waiting for some decent evidence of it. The consensus is if anything the opposite. Ditto that it would make us stronger and more influential in the world. The opposite has transpired there too. Same on immigration. Far from taking the heat out of that it's become an even more contentious issue.
Which leaves the sovereignty angle. That the point of Brexit was Brexit itself. It's a success by dint of having happened. For better or worse - with most metrics thus far indicating worse - we have taken back control. Forget all the rest, it is argued, this is the Brexit benefit. Pretty much the only one but nevertheless potentially big enough to justify almost a decade of division, paralysis and distraction.
So what I'd like to ask Leave voters, given the importance of this, is do they feel it? Do they feel more sovereign now we aren't in the EU? Is the supposed Brexit dividend of being more in control something real and tangible to them? But wait, we don't have to ask them because the polls tell us the answer. Many of them now think it was a mistake and most of those who don't remain so hacked off they want to hand power to Nigel Farage and his bunch of chancers, fantasists and unsavouries. All in all, it's not a good report card.
Dan Hannan's ludicrous article with his fantasy of life after Brexit springs to mind. That's what Brexiteers promised.
Some in this thread suggest that the overall effect of Brexit on the economy, and perhaps more generally, was fairly minor. Maybe that's correct, but had that been the prospectus offered, would people have voted for Brexit? No.
I remember that. Bit of a pipedream. Fwiw I can accept (without agreeing with) a pov that the economic impact is marginal. It's impossible to prove that stuff because so many things impact the economy.
It's the 'sovereignty' argument that interests me more. I mean, technically, yes of course we have more now since less is pooled. But that for me is a reductive, superficial view of what sovereignty means.
I'd rather pose a couple of practical questions. As a consequence of Brexit is Britain more influential in the world? As a consequence of Brexit do the people of Britain have more control over their lives? It's hard to answer yes to either.
So what was it all for other than to gratify and empower a crew of reactionary right wing ideologues plus Boris Johnson? Answers on a postcard.
Broadly I would say Brexit has two upsides and four downsides for the UK.
Upsides: 1. Flexibility. The EU takes forever to come to decision. The UK can be more nimble, eg Covid vaccines. 2. Greater accountability due to decisions being made closer to those affected by them.
Downsides: 1. Stresses the integrity of the United Kingdom. I think Northern Ireland is probably gone long term. Scotland less certain but Brexit doesn't help. Both nations voted Remain for good reasons. If you are an English, Irish or Scottish nationalist you obviously don't care about the existence of the United Kingdom, but it is the country we live in. 2. Loss of personal freedom and liberty, particularly to trade and go where you want This aim is incompatible with greater government control afforded by Brexit, eg on immigration. Some people prefer government control to liberty, which is why I haven't put that as an upside. Mileages may vary on this. 3. Economic loss - the subject of this series of headers 4. Loss of influence. This a lot more hard nosed than people think. It means getting more of what we want as a nation.
I do think the European Union is a net force for the good, so I am glad it exists, regardless of UK membership. Talking here about how Brexit affects the UK specifically.
Our independent approach on COVID vaccines was allowed under the EU rules.
Actually no. The EU tried to prevent countries from starting their vaccination campaigns independently because they wanted a single unified EU operation. They were late in authorising vaccines and were almost 3 months later than the UK in ordering vaccines.
One reason the UK vaccines rollout was far more successful is that we embedded the certifying authorities into the testing process rather than waiting until the process was completed before starting certification as the EU did.
Our vaccine approach was allowed under EU rules. It was not encouraged. But it was allowed..
Not true.
There are two systems fior authorising new medicines in the EU - a centralised system where medicines are authorised by the EU Commission based on the recommendations of the European Megicines Agency and a national system where medicines are authorised by the relevant agency of national governments.
But crucially, national authorisation only applies to generic drugs, non prescription drugs and older medicines created before the EMA existed.
Centralised approval based on recommendations from the EMA is compulsory for:
human medicines containing a new active substance to treat: human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS); cancer; diabetes; neurodegenerative diseases; auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions; viral diseases.
The Covid-19 vaccines were covered by this and had to be approved by the EMA for EU members.
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
According to this list then wealth per adult in USD in 2022:
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
I'm going to disagree with Noah a bit. (And bear in mind this is a 2022 Substack.)
There is crushing poverty in the US, to a level that in incomprehensible to a Brit or to a Slovenian.
The old silver mining "towns", barely 90 minutes out of booming Denver, are little better than the favelas in Brazil. Falling apart trailers. No jobs. No education. Just opiods, crystal meth and welfare checks.
They make the worst parts of East London or Blackpool look like heaven.
I'm sure there are parts of rural Pennsylvania and West Virginia that are similarly dirt poor.
And if you go to Mississippi, you will see that it has a higher GDP that the UK. And you'll look at Jackson - the State Capital - and you'll say "wah...". Because it doesn't feel like that at all. It feels economically incredibly poor, with empty buildings and shops.
To be fair Noah Smith does say 'We're a rich society with some very poor people' and there is a lot of poverty in the US. Yet as he points out the median American not just the richest Americans have higher incomes than any other developed nation except Switzerland and higher median disposable incomes than any nation except Luxembourg
'Deaths are expected to outnumber births in the UK every year from 2026, according to projections from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
The UK population is now expected to grow at a slower rate than previously thought, reaching 71 million by 2034, owing to a sharp fall in migration.
Declining fertility rates also mean the number of children in the UK is expected to fall in the next decade while pensioners are expected to grow faster than working age adults.
Previous projections suggested the population would continue to grow until 2096, but now "the population is projected to peak in the 2050s before decreasing," James Robards, ONS head of household and population projections, said.'
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
According to this list then wealth per adult in USD in 2022:
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
According to this list then wealth per adult in USD in 2022:
It's El Gord all over again, isn't it? All mouth and no trousers.
Starmer will be there until the end, debasing the role of Prime Minister... And then... the final denouement and Lab out of power for another decade (or more)
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
According to this list then wealth per adult in USD in 2022:
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
It's El Gord all over again, isn't it? All mouth and no trousers.
Starmer will be there until the end, debasing the role of Prime Minister... And then... the final denouement and Lab out of power for another decade (or more)
#WhatGoesAroundComesAround
However, this time it's all a lot more serious. As the political evisceration of Brown lead to a pretty benign Con/Lib government while Starmers downfall will lead to a pretty nasty REF government (and god knows what follows when Farage fails, as he will) 😢
For instance, while men support the use of nuclear power by a huge margin of 74% to 16%, just 30% of women are in favour, while a greater 42% are opposed.
That's an insane level of difference!
Less dramatic but nuclear is becoming a bit of bastion against renewables for right-wing voters. Largely given up on the case for fossil fuels.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
So now you're down on nuclear too? Is it just anything that stands a chance of providing predictable energy at a moderately affordable price? Let them eat windmills.
The problem with nuclear is that it looks incredibly expensive when compared to natural gas, and nuclear plants have historically had lots of unscheduled maintenance meaning uptime is often worse than offshore wind.
The number of nuclear power plants built withouth government subsidy in the history of the world is currently zero.
Worth noting how much nuclear China built last year (and they're building way more than everyone else) .. 3GW.
Versus new solar and wind - 278GW and 46GW.*
China's total nuclear capacity is only 120GW.
*Not exactly comparable, given intermittency, but the difference is stark.
They also added 66GW (and 189GWh) of battery storage.
Aside from the implications for grid storage, it means that within a very few years, EVs will be significantly cheaper than ICE vehicles.
By that do you mean running costs ie cost of petrol vs cost of recharging ?
Even if so that's only one factor in the cost of having a car, others including capital cost, insurance, tax and maintenance.
Nope they mean that the battery cost will be half what it currently is - so initial capital cost £3-8k less
That would be very good.
It might though cripple sales of current EV vehicles if a big price fall is expected on new cars within a few years.
It will be a few years before there's sufficient new capacity for that, and lithium batteries still have a power density (and therefore range) advantage.
But yes, the likely rapid fall in battery prices alongside increasing production might make for some interesting effects, as ICE and older battery tech manufacturing capacity is obsoleted, and perhaps left stranded.
Higher cost producers (the west) will feel that most. Also (for now) China has more financial capacity to subsidise its industry that a lot of other manufacturing countries.
Comments
That's an insane level of difference!
I nearly always prefer smaller oysters. They’re generally sweeter and more delicate
He just delivered it in a manner sufficiently emollient to charm everyone but Vance.
Amazing to see King Charles unify Congress in a way America craves. Great speech on our historic relationship, our democratic values, and our belief in freedom. 🇺🇸🇬🇧
US intelligence agencies are studying how Iran would respond if President Trump were to declare a unilateral victory and wind down the two-month-old war that has killed thousands and become a political liability for the White House, sources said
https://x.com/G_Slattery/status/2049196293696770474
Charles seemed to be genuinely enjoying himself.
So I wonder if the gender divide here is driven just as much by the underlying “culture war” as differing risk aversion.
Meet Roark Aerospace - the company that claims to be the UK's first defence unicorn.
No verified investors. No known customers. No public users.
Journalists have been unable to locate any employees, customers, users, investors, or industry experts that can vouch for it.
Early this year Patton French, the CEO and Founder of
@roark_aerospace
, sent round a press release stating that his company, which makes anti-drone systems, had closed a $210m Series B at a valuation of $1.6 billion.
On paper the company was flying:
> Over 4,000 customers
> 20,000 end users from across corporate, government, and military entities
> Total annual revenues in 2025 of $190 million..
https://x.com/SebJohnsonUK/status/2049140047794905262
It’s why it’s the most important indicator, followed by the proportion not wearing helmets.
Diplomat described Keir Starmer as being ‘on the ropes’ over Peter Mandelson scandal in private meeting with students'
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/28/uk-new-ambassador-to-us-christian-turner-starmer-mandelson-scandal
The message is something like, "we still want to be friends once you've got this Trump madness out of your system, and, sure, every country that's old enough makes mistakes. We've been there."
Thoughts. It was a rabble. Nobody has any inspiring policies.
Betting tip. Expect a record low turnout and bet accordingly.
Ratings:
1st - Ross Greer (Green)
2nd - Malcolm Offord (Reform)
then a gap to
3rd - John Swinney (SNP)
4th= - Anas Sarwar (Labour)
4th= - Alex Cole-Hamilton (Lib Dem)
then a bigger gap to
6th - Russell Findlay (Conservative) with fewer points than Sheffield Wednesday.
2 hours of my life I will never get back.
Wired: Labour to build virtually no new homes but introduce rent controls to show those landlord basta*ds.
Huge news from CATL, which has signed a 60 GWh sodium-ion battery deal with HyperStrong.
This is the largest sodium-ion order ever placed and equal to half of all energy storage batteries CATL delivered in 2025.
CATL claims sodium-ion mass production is solved.
https://x.com/ElectrekCo/status/2049120289355702684
Aside from the implications for grid storage, it means that within a very few years, EVs will be significantly cheaper than ICE vehicles.
Sir Keir Starmer has privately offered Angela Rayner a return to the Cabinet in an apparent attempt to head off a leadership coup, The Telegraph can reveal
It’s clearly the case and US politicians have also said as much.
Edit: vanilla still being useless. Thank f*ck the debate wasn’t duplicated.
https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/no-the-us-is-not-a-poor-society-with
British people like to think that both Britain and America are "poor societies with a few very rich people". In fact, this only describes Britain, not the U.S.
British people simply have difficulty comprehending how rich even working-class Americans are.
In West Yorkshire we've got the Brucie Bonus of the 'I can't believe it's not Hamas' Independents to give Labour an extra kicking.
This is a bit like the time you accused me of ramping for Chinese coal. You’ve gone a bit batty recently.
The number of nuclear power plants built withouth government subsidy in the history of the world is currently zero.
🌹 LAB: 21% (-30)
➡️ REF: 21% (+21)
🟢 GRN: 19% (+13)
ℹ️ OTH/IND: 14% (+13)
🌳 CON: 13% (-14)
🔶 LDEM: 12% (-3)
Via
@YouGov
MRP
27th Mar - 27th Apr
Changes vs. 2022 LE
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2049101109210370256?s=20
There is crushing poverty in the US, to a level that in incomprehensible to a Brit or to a Slovenian.
The old silver mining "towns", barely 90 minutes out of booming Denver, are little better than the favelas in Brazil. Falling apart trailers. No jobs. No education. Just opiods, crystal meth and welfare checks.
They make the worst parts of East London or Blackpool look like heaven.
I'm sure there are parts of rural Pennsylvania and West Virginia that are similarly dirt poor.
And if you go to Mississippi, you will see that it has a higher GDP that the UK. And you'll look at Jackson - the State Capital - and you'll say "wah...". Because it doesn't feel like that at all. It feels economically incredibly poor, with empty buildings and shops.
Who ends up running the council out of that lot?
ba-dum-tish.
League 1 is clearly the preferred division of Reform UK.
If he was top the others must have been dire.
Thought Morgan played a poor hand well. Talked about actual policies
Plaid and Ref were at each other's throats and accused each other of racism
Con didn't attack Ref and mainly attacked Lab
LD was motherhood and apple pie and admitted they wouldn't win
Green was ineffectual and not actually Welsh (reminded me of Leonard in Scotland)
We were in Parliament today calling for an investigation into Keir Starmer over the Mandelson scandal.
When it came down to it, Nigel Farage and Robert Jenrick didn’t even bother to show up and vote.
They let Keir Starmer off the hook.
https://x.com/conservatives/status/2049209754874953872?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
It’s peace with the strikers.
Peace just in time.
The vote in Parliament tonight was great theatre, but the three-line whip meant it would never be close.
I want Starmer out, which is why I spent the day campaigning for it.
If Reform crush Labour next week, he will be gone.
https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/2049243204134826215?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
There are two systems fior authorising new medicines in the EU - a centralised system where medicines are authorised by the EU Commission based on the recommendations of the European Megicines Agency and a national system where medicines are authorised by the relevant agency of national governments.
But crucially, national authorisation only applies to generic drugs, non prescription drugs and older medicines created before the EMA existed.
Centralised approval based on recommendations from the EMA is compulsory for:
human medicines containing a new active substance to treat:
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS);
cancer;
diabetes;
neurodegenerative diseases;
auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions;
viral diseases.
The Covid-19 vaccines were covered by this and had to be approved by the EMA for EU members.
Median
UK 151k
USA 107k
Mean
UK 302k
USA 551k
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult
Which suggests that the average working class Briton is wealthier than the average working class American.
This site
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/wealth-per-adult-by-country
gives median wealth per capita in 2026:
UK 176k
USA 124k
Even if so that's only one factor in the cost of having a car, others including capital cost, insurance, tax and maintenance.
The UK population is now expected to grow at a slower rate than previously thought, reaching 71 million by 2034, owing to a sharp fall in migration.
Declining fertility rates also mean the number of children in the UK is expected to fall in the next decade while pensioners are expected to grow faster than working age adults.
Previous projections suggested the population would continue to grow until 2096, but now "the population is projected to peak in the 2050s before decreasing," James Robards, ONS head of household and population projections, said.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgpjd2zzl8o
It might though cripple sales of current EV vehicles if a big price fall is expected on new cars within a few years.
There's much greater variation within the two countries than between them on house prices.
Something which might be a factor in the lower USA median wealth is the higher USA personal debt.
It's El Gord all over again, isn't it? All mouth and no trousers.
Starmer will be there until the end, debasing the role of Prime Minister... And then... the final denouement and Lab out of power for another decade (or more)
#WhatGoesAroundComesAround
1) Much higher government debt in the USA
2) More hours worked per year
So are the claims of vast American wealth based upon much more than greater inequality, bigger houses, more work and more debt ?
https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2049270437385769435
Versus new solar and wind - 278GW and 46GW.*
China's total nuclear capacity is only 120GW.
*Not exactly comparable, given intermittency, but the difference is stark.
They also added 66GW (and 189GWh) of battery storage.
But yes, the likely rapid fall in battery prices alongside increasing production might make for some interesting effects, as ICE and older battery tech manufacturing capacity is obsoleted, and perhaps left stranded.
Higher cost producers (the west) will feel that most.
Also (for now) China has more financial capacity to subsidise its industry that a lot of other manufacturing countries.