Local gvt should be a case study of how you can take 40% out of a public service and it not make the slightest jot of difference to the service delivered. The struggle is led by increased social services demand and is only now hitting home. Local gvt has now reached a point where it needs to grow adult care greater than inflation.
We need to be rolling these kind of cuts across the board. Nhs and education behave as if they’ve undergone some kind of austerity. Utter bolderdash. Gvt should have had the guts to do the same. People think they have anyway.
Whilst i agree to some extent - especially where education is concerned, NHS is a bit more problematic because of the extent to which there is a permanent stuggle to match public demand and expectation, the irony is that the problems in Local Government have not been solely caused by Central Government cuts, but by the "one size fits all" approach to restricting the ability of authorities to compensate by raising Council tax. The cuts were an opportunity to re-invigorate local democracy to some extent, by allowing local politicians to make genuine choices between raising taxes, making cuts, or finding 'painless' efficiencies, but this has been denied them. The irony being that previously relatively efficient authorities were actually penalised more because they had already made the efficiencies that others were now forced into, and had lower ability to raise taxes because of their inevitably lower tax basis.
You haven’t, sure. But your pensions have been protected by the tax payer, whilst the rest of us have seen the sums we need for our old age multiply as interest rates have gone subterranean.
The SCOTUS nomination is turning into a car crash for the Republicans. Hot on the heels of the attempted rape claim comes more whispers about what did Kavanaugh know about disgraced judge Alex Kozinski's behaviour when he clerked for him?
The attempted rape claim needs to be properly tested before it can be allowed to become a received fact. There are significant differences between the various versions of events described by the complainant. She is not even that certain as to which year it happened.
By holding this back until the very end of the process, the Democrats have made it very difficult for Kavanaugh to get an opportunity to challenge these serious accusations.
Which is probably why they acted in the way they did....
Is there any evidence for that ? Feinstein, who had the original letter, has been criticised both for not real easing it, and also for releasing it - but what is eminently clear is that the woman herself wishes to pursue the matter.
And why would the Democrats owe Kavanaugh anything ?
Local gvt should be a case study of how you can take 40% out of a public service and it not make the slightest jot of difference to the service delivered. The struggle is led by increased social services demand and is only now hitting home. Local gvt has now reached a point where it needs to grow adult care greater than inflation.
We need to be rolling these kind of cuts across the board. Nhs and education behave as if they’ve undergone some kind of austerity. Utter bolderdash. Gvt should have had the guts to do the same. People think they have anyway.
Whilst i agree to some extent - especially where education is concerned, NHS is a bit more problematic because of the extent to which there is a permanent stuggle to match public demand and expectation, the irony is that the problems in Local Government have not been solely caused by Central Government cuts, but by the "one size fits all" approach to restricting the ability of authorities to compensate by raising Council tax. The cuts were an opportunity to re-invigorate local democracy to some extent, by allowing local politicians to make genuine choices between raising taxes, making cuts, or finding 'painless' efficiencies, but this has been denied them. The irony being that previously relatively efficient authorities were actually penalised more because they had already made the efficiencies that others were now forced into, and had lower ability to raise taxes because of their inevitably lower tax basis.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
I think actually people aren’t dog too badly. Public services are pretty good, child poverty down, adult poverty down, pensioner poverty all but disappearing. The struggle has been to reduce cyclical spending without massive cuts. This has come about by a six year long public sector freeze. Predictably though is has resulted in a struggle to recruit and retain skilled public service staff. Did I also mention Full Employment?
What is shocking to me is the apparent complete lack of understanding of the depth of the crisis that Local Government is in. Outside of those really experiencing it, i think even those who think they realise are underestimating the problems. Even some Councillors in affected authorities are only vaguely aware of the scale of what they are dealing with. The gap between public (and central government) perception and reality is shocking.
I work for a London local authority, in finance, not at a vastly senior level, but with a level of experience that (especially given the turnover in recent years) means that i probably know more about how the place works than almost anyone else. My cost to the the tax payer (inclusive of oncosts - 'gold plated' pension, "generous" holidays etc etc) is probably around £250 a day. A generic replacement at my level, at current market rates would cost potentially north of £450 a day. And that's a generic replacement - anyone who works in a local authority knows that (outside of a few very specific areas) there is no such thing as a generic replacement - experience and inside knowledge is irreplaceable. How is it remotely possible to close that gap? Who's going to want to take a permanent role with generous holidays when you can work as an interim for the same salary and take 1/3 of the year off? When you can create your own gold plated pension all by yourself?
Once the public sector could rely on an element of "public sector ethos" and general goodwill from staff. These days when conditions are being regularly downgraded by benchmarking to the lowest common private sector comparator, when "job security" is only guaranteed by the pace of people fleeing exceeding the pace of cuts, this is increasingly a fantasy. The only reason people don't leave is because of inertia. Or because they are too close to retirement. But there is no new generation coming through. And none that will commit to the long term.
I'd agree with pretty much all of that. It was an easy target, not entirely unreasonably, but people are now pretty complacent about just how much trouble is developing now.
My Trust had no beds again today, in September. This is going to be another difficult winter.
EU wants us to "stare into the abyss" and then we'll blink.
Seems a dangerous assumption to me...
Indeed, much of the past hundred years history of Europe consists the fallout of Continentals assuming the Brits won’t do things the Brits have said they would do. Belgium 1914, Poland 1939, Brexit 2016.....
More than just one hundred years. Could go back nearly six centuries and say the same.
If anything this quote is far more likely to raise a British stiff upper lip and get us willing to stare down the abyss without flinching.
I think actually people aren’t dog too badly. Public services are pretty good, child poverty down, adult poverty down, pensioner poverty all but disappearing. The struggle has been to reduce cyclical spending without massive cuts. This has come about by a six year long public sector freeze. Predictably though is has resulted in a struggle to recruit and retain skilled public service staff. Did I also mention Full Employment?
What is shocking to me is the apparent complete lack of understanding of the depth of the crisis that Local Government is in. Outside of those really experiencing it, i think even those who think they realise are underestimating the problems. Even some Councillors in affected authorities are only vaguely aware of the scale of what they are dealing with. The gap between public (and central government) perception and reality is shocking.
I work for a London local authority, in finance, not at a vastly senior level, but with a level of experience that (especially given the turnover in recent years) means that i probably know more about how the place works than almost anyone else. My cost to the the tax payer (inclusive of oncosts - 'gold plated' pension, "generous" holidays etc etc) is probably around £250 a day. A generic replacement at my level, at current market rates would cost potentially north of £450 a day. And that's a generic replacement - anyone who works in a local authority knows that (outside of a few very specific areas) there is no such thing as a generic replacement - experience and inside knowledge is irreplaceable. How is it remotely possible to close that gap? Who's going to want to take a permanent role with generous holidays when you can work as an interim for the same salary and take 1/3 of the year off? When you can create your own gold plated pension all by yourself?
Once the public sector could rely on an element of "public sector ethos" and general goodwill from staff. These days when conditions are being regularly downgraded by benchmarking to the lowest common private sector comparator, when "job security" is only guaranteed by the pace of people fleeing exceeding the pace of cuts, this is increasingly a fantasy. The only reason people don't leave is because of inertia. Or because they are too close to retirement. But there is no new generation coming through. And none that will commit to the long term.
I'd agree with pretty much all of that. It was an easy target, not entirely unreasonably, but people are now pretty complacent about just how much trouble is developing now.
My Trust had no beds again today, in September. This is going to be another difficult winter.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Check your privilege.
We're all privileged to be in this country. Check yours and look around the globe.
Well good to see some reality reasserting itself after the last few days of puff pieces saying how a deal was now imminent. As I expected, the ‘movement’ on the NI backstop is just the EU saying they can use technology to make the Irish Sea border invisible (amazing that technology can work there but not at the real border...) - the EU still completely missing the point that a different regulatory regime in NI is unacceptable no matter how it works.
Now the French are comimg along saying a blind Brexit with a declaration nobody understands won’t work. And everyone is still in agreement that the customs partnership, the critical part of Chequers, won’t work. So basically, nothing at all seems to have changed.
No deal looks as clear as ever. All this seems to be about is gettng TM through the conference without getting humiliated by her own party members.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Check your privilege.
My privilege (together with prudent financial management, it has to be said) means that I'm almost completely insulated from things like unemployment massively rising. So from a personal point of view I wouldn't have been hit by the disaster Brown was leading the country into, nor by the kind of high unemployment seen on mainland Europe. Osborne's management of the economy, succeeding in rescuing us from a situation where state was overspending by a gobsmacking 25%, whilst keeping unemployment low and falling over the period of his stewardship, was a spectacular success for those who aren't insulated like me from the downsides.
Agreed. Admittedly it’s the Guardian, so they might’ve taken the most Euro starry eyed 23 year old, fresh out of the box, who’s in charge of harmonising speed limit road signs out to lunch and poured two bottles of Chablis down him/her to extract such a quote, that fits their narrative, for all I know, but even so. Bloody clueless.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Check your privilege.
My privilege (together with prudent financial management, it has to be said) means that I'm almost completely insulated from things like unemployment massively rising. So from a personal point of view I wouldn't have been hit by the disaster Brown was leading the country into, nor by the kind of high unemployment seen on mainland Europe. Osborne's management of the economy, succeeding in rescuing us from a situation where state was overspending by a gobsmacking 25%, whilst keeping unemployment low and falling over the period of his stewardship, was a spectacular success for those who aren't insulated like me from the downsides.
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
EU wants us to "stare into the abyss" and then we'll blink.
Seems a dangerous assumption to me...
Indeed, much of the past hundred years history of Europe consists the fallout of Continentals assuming the Brits won’t do things the Brits have said they would do. Belgium 1914, Poland 1939, Brexit 2016.....
More than just one hundred years. Could go back nearly six centuries and say the same.
If anything this quote is far more likely to raise a British stiff upper lip and get us willing to stare down the abyss without flinching.
So this is our Darkest Hour? Really? That is really really unhelpful
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
Except the breakthrough that was agreed in December is not the backstop that Barnier is claiming now. What Barnier is claiming now was vetoed in December by the DUP and not the agreement, its the breakthrough he wanted then but not the one he got then.
He's just acting as if the DUP veto in December and subsequent changes to the agreement never happened now and people in the UK are letting him get away with it.
May was ‘very clear’ that the backstop agreed in December was just a form of words to allow negotiations to move foward. She briefed out this message extensively. You are right that Barnier then acted with the total lack of good faith which illustrates why we should never agree to pay the money in return for a political declaration. But our leaders seem to delight in being stupid.
Yes, Baker and co should have resigned in December but as PT says, the declaration agreed then was sufficiently vague that they had a justification for carrying on. At least they eventually stood up to be counted.
Those of us who said in December that the NI backstop should never have been agreed at all have been proven right.
The SCOTUS nomination is turning into a car crash for the Republicans. Hot on the heels of the attempted rape claim comes more whispers about what did Kavanaugh know about disgraced judge Alex Kozinski's behaviour when he clerked for him?
The attempted rape claim needs to be properly tested before it can be allowed to become a received fact. There are significant differences between the various versions of events described by the complainant. She is not even that certain as to which year it happened.
By holding this back until the very end of the process, the Democrats have made it very difficult for Kavanaugh to get an opportunity to challenge these serious accusations.
Which is probably why they acted in the way they did.
If he did it - then he should suffer accordingly. But trial by Democrat leaks is not fair for anyone. Not on Kavanaugh and not on the woman making the claims.
As for whispers about other things - they should be on the record or ignored. Gossip is not evidence of anything.
You might also consider that the only reason this seems like the eleventh hour is the unseemly rush to confirm Kavanaugh. There is no good reason, for example, why the Democrats were given 15 hours to review 40,000 pages of documents not released until the eve of the hearing.
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.
Not in your original reply.
Err:
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.
Not in your original reply.
Err:
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Err...
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.
Not in your original reply.
Err:
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Err...
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...
Well, if you ignore half of what I say, then yes I agree I didn't put it in context. It doesn't reflect well on your comprehension skills if you can't read on to the next sentence.
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.
Not in your original reply.
Err:
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Err...
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...
Personally I cannot see " You've never had it so good" going down well as a campaign slogan in the next few years, but if you want to try canvassing with it on the Saffron Lane Estate, I would recommend a good pair of running shoes!
Stodge’s original point is right, though. The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.
Not in your original reply.
Err:
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Err...
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...
Well, if you ignore half of what I say, then yes I agree I didn't put it in context. It doesn't reflect well on your comprehension skills if you can't read on to the next sentence.
I’ll stipulate that you put a silly claim in context, if that makes you happy.
Are the Germans going to be providing the Luftwaffe again for this darkest hour redux?
They really are fucking clueless if they said such a thing.
Last time we had a 'darkest hour' we didn't give ground, as I understand it.
Battle of Britain language is rather absurd when cheerleading the forces of the hard right against liberal democratic international organisations.
And of course, the Battle of Britain and following years did break us as a worldwide power, indeed that was the reason we joined the EEC in the first place.
Are the Germans going to be providing the Luftwaffe again for this darkest hour redux?
They really are fucking clueless if they said such a thing.
Last time we had a 'darkest hour' we didn't give ground, as I understand it.
Battle of Britain language is rather absurd when cheerleading the forces of the hard right against liberal democratic international organisations.
And of course, the Battle of Britain and following years did break us as a worldwide power, indeed that was the reason we joined the EEC in the first place.
According to the Guardian's report (which frankly I think is a load of unattributed tosh), it's the EU who are using that rather unfortunate Battle of Britain language, comparing themselves to Nazi Germany.
Really I think the Guardian shouldn't be running such stuff as 'news'.
EU wants us to "stare into the abyss" and then we'll blink.
Seems a dangerous assumption to me...
Indeed, much of the past hundred years history of Europe consists the fallout of Continentals assuming the Brits won’t do things the Brits have said they would do. Belgium 1914, Poland 1939, Brexit 2016.....
More than just one hundred years. Could go back nearly six centuries and say the same.
If anything this quote is far more likely to raise a British stiff upper lip and get us willing to stare down the abyss without flinching.
So this is our Darkest Hour? Really? That is really really unhelpful
I don't think so but its what the Guardian claim the EU spokesman is saying. I guess the EU spokesman thinks they are the Nazis? Or more likely didn't think at all.
Well good to see some reality reasserting itself after the last few days of puff pieces saying how a deal was now imminent. As I expected, the ‘movement’ on the NI backstop is just the EU saying they can use technology to make the Irish Sea border invisible (amazing that technology can work there but not at the real border...) - the EU still completely missing the point that a different regulatory regime in NI is unacceptable no matter how it works.
Now the French are comimg along saying a blind Brexit with a declaration nobody understands won’t work. And everyone is still in agreement that the customs partnership, the critical part of Chequers, won’t work. So basically, nothing at all seems to have changed.
No deal looks as clear as ever. All this seems to be about is gettng TM through the conference without getting humiliated by her own party members.
All the polling shows No deal would see Remain win a second referendum, thus ending Brexit.
If Brexit is going to succeed there has to be a deal and most likely that will require a transition period alongside the withdrawal agreement to negotiate
There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.
There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT based on a statement by the Russian defence ministry. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet bar one Aussie site which speculates Israel may have been involved.
There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you.
I see a lot that isn't right or positive whether it be well-run local authorities being forced to cut services because this Government is unable or unwilling to help them. I also see too many people, especially in London, struggling to survive, people who have to work long hours often in more than one job to pay for the basics of life.
Do I think Labour could do any better? No and I criticised them on here aplenty in the Blair and Brown years.
I'm not prepared to give any Government a free pass - I have a right to criticise, to question and to offer alternatives, that's called democracy last time I looked.
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.
I'd say it is much more mixed up.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.
I thought the idea was for Governments to stand on their record and it's not unreasonable for me, as a voter, to ask what the Conservatives have achieved since 2010.
19% reduction in the armed forces. So, there's that.
There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet.
There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT based on a statement by the Russian defence ministry. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet bar one Aussie site which speculates Israel may have been involved.
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.
I'd say it is much more mixed up.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.
Not necessarily.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.
Take the idea of the detection of launch from a French frigate with a pinch of salt, not least some of their number has no such ripple launch surface to surface capability. There is no decisive evidence yet that the believed Israeli attack came from the air, there is the possibility the attack was launched from the sea.
Its the location of the targets that has led to this confused situation and possibly the unfortunate demise of the Coot. Those lads in Tel Aviv don't tend to get their targeting wrong but its a high risk area. If there is one thing Russia really doesn't want, its a confrontation with the Israelis in that region.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
OT Time magazine has been sold to the Salesforce (a cloud IT service for supporting enterprise sales teams) owner. This should not affect the Time Person of the Year, which we bet on: The announcement by Meredith said the Benioffs would not be involved in day-to-day operations or journalistic decisions at Time. Honest.
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
I would argue that Kenneth Clarke was the last Chancellor to encourage saving, through ISAs, PEPs and the like. Remember that trade deficits and surpluses have nothing to do with exchange rates, and everything to do with savings rates.
He also took on the white collar unions - the teachers, the medics and the lawyers. For which he also deserves credit.
From a domestic point of view, his policies were the right ones.
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
I would argue that Kenneth Clarke was the last Chancellor to encourage saving, through ISAs, PEPs and the like. Remember that trade deficits and surpluses have nothing to do with exchange rates, and everything to do with savings rates.
He also took on the white collar unions - the teachers, the medics and the lawyers. For which he also deserves credit.
From a domestic point of view, his policies were the right ones.
You say Clarke took on the white collar unions: some might say it was Clarke's attacks on those Conservative-voting professionals that cost the Tories the election.
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.
I'd say it is much more mixed up.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.
Not necessarily.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.
Who wouldn't want to live in a place with 70% leavers?
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Ken Clarke wasn’t Chancellor on Black Wednesday.
Plus by 1997 the Tories were more trusted on the economy than Labour.
In April 1997 the Tories had a 22% lead on the economy
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Its almost as strange as those who think Brown knew anything about economics/
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Its almost as strange as those who think Brown knew anything about economics/
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.
I'd say it is much more mixed up.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.
Not necessarily.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.
Well, I live pleasantly near Cambridge, and we could probably have quite a good lifestyle - perhaps even a better lifestyle - in the Hartlepool area on our existing salary.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.
Its almost as strange as those who think Brown knew anything about economics/
Or as strange as @ralphmalph who lumps Iraq and Afghanistan with Tory errors.
Or for the matter of that, blames the Tory party for a total collapse in law and order (which I think is in any case an exaggeration) in a city run by a Labour figure.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.
Some years ago the Ku Klux Klan posted a link on their website to Westboro Street Baptist Church, with the disclaimer they did not endorse the views of that organisation.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP. We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof. The police can not be bothered to investigate. London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots. Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window, We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc. The politicians are still clueless. Social housing has collapsed. The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service, The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation. I could go on, but I will stop there.
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.
The ultimate political answer of a question. But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
I would argue that Kenneth Clarke was the last Chancellor to encourage saving, through ISAs, PEPs and the like. Remember that trade deficits and surpluses have nothing to do with exchange rates, and everything to do with savings rates.
He also took on the white collar unions - the teachers, the medics and the lawyers. For which he also deserves credit.
From a domestic point of view, his policies were the right ones.
I thought the idea was for Governments to stand on their record and it's not unreasonable for me, as a voter, to ask what the Conservatives have achieved since 2010.
19% reduction in the armed forces. So, there's that.
The most shameful part of the Conservative record, in my view.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.
Three points:
1) You admit it was a golden legacy;
2) I would point out that the then Shadow Chancellor was furious not at the debacle of Black Wednesday but at the decision to withdraw from the ERM, which with hindsight was clearly the right decision (the stupid mistake, made by Major, was joining at all). The SCE at this time was a young political scientist called Gordon Brown;
3) That is still not what you said the first time. You may have phrased it poorly, but the fact is you were wrong.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.
Three points:
1) You admit it was a golden legacy;
2) I would point out that the then Shadow Chancellor was furious not at the debacle of Black Wednesday but at the decision to withdraw from the ERM, which with hindsight was clearly the right decision (the stupid mistake, made by Major, was joining at all). The SCE at this time was a young political scientist called Gordon Brown;
3) That is still not what you said the first time. You may have phrased it poorly, but the fact is you were wrong.
Stop trolling. What I said was so clear that even you knew what I meant.
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.
Three points:
1) You admit it was a golden legacy;
2) I would point out that the then Shadow Chancellor was furious not at the debacle of Black Wednesday but at the decision to withdraw from the ERM, which with hindsight was clearly the right decision (the stupid mistake, made by Major, was joining at all). The SCE at this time was a young political scientist called Gordon Brown;
3) That is still not what you said the first time. You may have phrased it poorly, but the fact is you were wrong.
Stop trolling. What I said was so clear that even you knew what I meant.
It really, really wasn't clear. Or rather, it was clear and totally wrong, and you may notice I am not the only person to have pulled you up over it.
I am also faintly surprised that repeating your own words back to you is considered 'trolling.'
Mr. Mark, one can be pro- or anti-Chequers, but I find the Gove line that we should negotiate any old shit deal, leave, then renegotiate to be utterly baffling.
Any deal we strike will likely last a long time and we should proceed on that basis. Assuming it'll be changed quickly, or easily, is just complacency and could see us lumbered with some vile capitulation.
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.
Who wouldn't want to live in a place with 70% leavers?
I wasn't particularly meaning to run down Hartlepool, more to point out that voters experience of the economy is not just their own individual experience. It encompasses the experience of their family, friends, and fellow townsfolk. We are empathetic beings, and working alongside others either suffering austerity (or prospering) influences our perceptions and voting behaviour.
Sajid Javid, the home secretary, has suggested to colleagues that he wants to introduce limits and visas for EU citizens after Brexit.
In a move likely to cause tit-for-tat retaliation by Europe, the Home Office informed cabinet ministers last week of its intention to copy the existing migration system used to determine non-EU migration and apply it to Europeans who arrive in Britain after December 2020.
The new system, which is still being agreed across government, will be sold as a “global” migration system, ending free movement for the EU.
Mr. Mark, one can be pro- or anti-Chequers, but I find the Gove line that we should negotiate any old shit deal, leave, then renegotiate to be utterly baffling.
Any deal we strike will likely last a long time and we should proceed on that basis. Assuming it'll be changed quickly, or easily, is just complacency and could see us lumbered with some vile capitulation.
If course, that renegotiation could go many ways, most likely to a closer relationship as the Remainers swell the ranks of those wanting EEA Single Market membership.
While cleary less good than full EU membership, EEA is probably the best option on the table, as it is off the shelf and easy to fit into established rules and regulations.
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.
I'd say it is much more mixed up.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.
Not necessarily.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.
Sure the Fitzwilliam museum is great and free to visit.
But how many times does the average person in Cambridge visit the Fitzwilliam museum each year ?
I'll have a guess at less than once.
The theatre / exhibitions / posh restaurant lifestyle really is pretty niche even in a place like Cambridge.
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you.
I see a lot that isn't right or positive whether it be well-run local authorities being forced to cut services because this Government is unable or unwilling to help them. I also see too many people, especially in London, struggling to survive, people who have to work long hours often in more than one job to pay for the basics of life.
Do I think Labour could do any better? No and I criticised them on here aplenty in the Blair and Brown years.
I'm not prepared to give any Government a free pass - I have a right to criticise, to question and to offer alternatives, that's called democracy last time I looked.
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.
I'd say it is much more mixed up.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.
Not necessarily.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
Depends how you define nice, and there are probably lots of ways of doing so.
Comments
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
The 2004 pension Act has destroyed final salary pension in the vast vast majority of the private sector. Especially those under about 45.
Feinstein, who had the original letter, has been criticised both for not real easing it, and also for releasing it - but what is eminently clear is that the woman herself wishes to pursue the matter.
And why would the Democrats owe Kavanaugh anything ?
If anything this quote is far more likely to raise a British stiff upper lip and get us willing to stare down the abyss without flinching.
Now the French are comimg along saying a blind Brexit with a declaration nobody understands won’t work. And everyone is still in agreement that the customs partnership, the critical part of Chequers, won’t work. So basically, nothing at all seems to have changed.
No deal looks as clear as ever. All this seems to be about is gettng TM through the conference without getting humiliated by her own party members.
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
Yes, Baker and co should have resigned in December but as PT says, the declaration agreed then was sufficiently vague that they had a justification for carrying on. At least they eventually stood up to be counted.
Those of us who said in December that the NI backstop should never have been agreed at all have been proven right.
There is no good reason, for example, why the Democrats were given 15 hours to review 40,000 pages of documents not released until the eve of the hearing.
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...
They really are fucking clueless if they said such a thing.
And of course, the Battle of Britain and following years did break us as a worldwide power, indeed that was the reason we joined the EEC in the first place.
Enough banter. I'm off to bed, happy anyway!
Really I think the Guardian shouldn't be running such stuff as 'news'.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45555749
If Brexit is going to succeed there has to be a deal and most likely that will require a transition period alongside the withdrawal agreement to negotiate
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
https://www.rt.com/news/438673-russian-il20-disappears-radars/
https://www.themercury.com.au/news/world/fears-israel-has-shotdown-russian-spy-plane-during-raid-on-syria/news-story/137795732772ab4e772be5594c216c51
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.
Its the location of the targets that has led to this confused situation and possibly the unfortunate demise of the Coot. Those lads in Tel Aviv don't tend to get their targeting wrong but its a high risk area. If there is one thing Russia really doesn't want, its a confrontation with the Israelis in that region.
"CBS News-YouGov House Model: Democrats 222, Republicans 213"
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/08/19/cbs-news-yougov-house-model-democrats-222-republic
Elon Musk in creating the Golgafrincham B Ark.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/sep/17/time-magazine-sold-marc-benioff-190m
He also took on the white collar unions - the teachers, the medics and the lawyers. For which he also deserves credit.
From a domestic point of view, his policies were the right ones.
https://metro.co.uk/video/two-women-fight-waiting-paul-nuttall-hartlepool-1455567/
Plus by 1997 the Tories were more trusted on the economy than Labour.
In April 1997 the Tories had a 22% lead on the economy
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/best-party-key-issues-managing-economy
The latter clause is probably the issue.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4NB3neSNfmg
Or for the matter of that, blames the Tory party for a total collapse in law and order (which I think is in any case an exaggeration) in a city run by a Labour figure.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
1) You admit it was a golden legacy;
2) I would point out that the then Shadow Chancellor was furious not at the debacle of Black Wednesday but at the decision to withdraw from the ERM, which with hindsight was clearly the right decision (the stupid mistake, made by Major, was joining at all). The SCE at this time was a young political scientist called Gordon Brown;
3) That is still not what you said the first time. You may have phrased it poorly, but the fact is you were wrong.
I am also faintly surprised that repeating your own words back to you is considered 'trolling.'
"A contract is just a pause in our negotiations...."
Mr. Mark, one can be pro- or anti-Chequers, but I find the Gove line that we should negotiate any old shit deal, leave, then renegotiate to be utterly baffling.
Any deal we strike will likely last a long time and we should proceed on that basis. Assuming it'll be changed quickly, or easily, is just complacency and could see us lumbered with some vile capitulation.
In a move likely to cause tit-for-tat retaliation by Europe, the Home Office informed cabinet ministers last week of its intention to copy the existing migration system used to determine non-EU migration and apply it to Europeans who arrive in Britain after December 2020.
The new system, which is still being agreed across government, will be sold as a “global” migration system, ending free movement for the EU.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3712652c-bac1-11e8-9e6e-515c1ae38369
NEW THREAD
While cleary less good than full EU membership, EEA is probably the best option on the table, as it is off the shelf and easy to fit into established rules and regulations.
But how many times does the average person in Cambridge visit the Fitzwilliam museum each year ?
I'll have a guess at less than once.
The theatre / exhibitions / posh restaurant lifestyle really is pretty niche even in a place like Cambridge.