The UK Politics Thread [Wot did Jez do now...]

[phonics]

Paul Simon.

He wrote a book about Zurich that I'd read a review of, turns out. Tim Shipman, being who I was speaking of.

[Lewis]

The best and most sensible explanation is that people don't particularly like the European Union.

[John]

Definitely not. You can clearly read it about three ways if you so wish. This was John btw, I'm battling a bug in Google Chrome with quotes.

You could, but two of them would be wrong.

[phonics]

Am loving how clearly far away from the original point we are. Britain can't claim to be a 'liberal' country anymore.

[Yevrah]

Am loving how clearly far away from the original point we are. Britain isn't a 'liberal' country anymore.

Of course it is and you're off your rocker if you think otherwise.

[Boydy]

You need choose your words more carefully. Your original post implied that you were referencing Yev's specific 'Leave' vote, not the overall result.

I don't think it implied that.

[phonics]

Of course it is and you're off your rocker if you think otherwise.

People on both sides of the poltical spectrum aren't allowed to speak in public. You even railed against no platforming.

People who use the internet have every detail logged in case they commit a crime in the future.

There are more CCTV cameras in the UK than any other nation on earth. Our CCTV technology allows us to recognise people based on their gait ffs.

You can be sued for refusing business as a private enterprise on religious and political grounds.

Etc. Etc. Etc.

Lewis and I live on far different belief systems but I think the idea that we're 'liberal' can be quantified as a joke by both sides.

[Boydy]

This all depends on what you take 'liberal' to mean.

But it's a bit pointless anyway because saying that ridiculous surveillance and censorship bills are okay because they won't be implemented properly because we're too liberal a country (whatever you take it to mean) is worryingly complacent.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Burundi is probably quite liberal in that case.

[Yevrah]

The surveillance is already happening and has been for years, they've just legalised it now.

But that wasn't the point I was arguing, mine was specifically about the porn bill, which just isn't going to be enforced.

[Boydy]

Burundi is probably quite liberal in that case.

And North Korea represents the sort of police state you seem to want.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/PYEGoZXABBMuk/200.gif#0

[phonics]

Have to say, some third world countries have more rights than us is a new argument for less of them.

[Boydy]

The surveillance is already happening and has been for years, they've just legalised it now.


Oh, well, that's fine then, isn't it?

[phonics]

But that wasn't the point I was arguing, mine was specifically about the porn bill, which just isn't going to be enforced.

And as I said, it's not about this porn bill. It's about them being able to legalise censorship.

No law is about just the law itself, it's about the precedent it sets.

[Boydy]

If a Labour government was doing this, you'd all be shitting the bed about the nanny state and the impending red terror.

[Yevrah]

Oh, well, that's fine then, isn't it?

I didn't say it was.

[Yevrah]

If a Labour government was doing this, you'd all be shitting the bed about the nanny state and the impending red terror.

Hardly.

[ItalAussie]

Neither side wants small government. Both sides just want to focus on big governing the things they care about most.

[Byron]

Hardly.

Give over. Given the constant right wing circlejerk on here if this was Labour you and GS would be tossing each other off about how this represents another reason Labour should stay out of power.

[GS]

Give over. Given the constant right wing circlejerk on here if this was Labour you and GS would be tossing each other off about how this represents another reason Labour should stay out of power.

As part of their wider incompetence. When the Tories bring with them impending economic doom, we'll draw full comparison.

I don't have a huge issue with an opt in for porn in households with children / another mechanism for controlling access for children. It's still parental choice, albeit you're requiring them to actively make one. I haven't given any thought to a system for that, mind you.

However, adults should be able to go about their lives without the state sticking their nose in all over the show. This, and the accompanying shit legislation on surveillance, is horrendous state overreach. It shouldn't happen, but alas here we are.

Regrettably, this sort of thing is what governments legislate on and the opposition oppose for the sake of opposition regardless of which party is in government. It doesn't actually matter who's in government, because the exact same thing would happen - roles would just be reversed. Groupthink of the worst kind in government circles.

[GS]

Am loving how clearly far away from the original point we are. Britain can't claim to be a 'liberal' country anymore.

That depends how you define liberalism. If by liberalism you mean "progressive" (that is, this much fabled "progressive majority"), then I would agree - but the " anymore " is redundant as the "progressive majority" is a myth. Presumably one the likes of Caroline Lucas and Tim Farron need to justify why they bother.

[GS]

It's a piece of piss to get around in China, and then the government use state surveillance to work out who's accessing VPNs and trace it back. It's just the first step towards a Police State. They don't care that Magic is watching porn, they do care if he's organising anti-establishment protest AND watching dodgy porn.

P.S. I love that you say "We're just a far too liberal country" after voting Brexit and being a-okay with unelected, absolute nutter, Theresa May as PM for the duration.

Just on the last point, we don't directly elect the executive branch so it's irrelevant that she wasn't leader at the last election. It's about commanding the confidence of the house, and it's either willful ignorance of the system or outright stupidity to not understand this.

After all, the last four PMs who won a majority left office during the parliament and we didn't have an election. The last time we did was Eden in 1955, but even then the Tories had been in since 1951 and one was due.

[phonics]

As part of their wider incompetence. When the Tories bring with them impending economic doom, we'll draw full comparison.

Have literally been in control of the economy for a decade. Still Labours fault.

Pass terrible state control bills. Still Labours fault.

[Boydy]

A decade? It's been six years.

[phonics]

With this and the kid born in 2000, I clearly have lost all perception of time.

[Kikó]

The economy is fine.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Why would The Nigel want to emigrate to America, dare we ask?

[GS]

Have literally been in control of the economy for a decade. Still Labours fault.

Pass terrible state control bills. Still Labours fault.

Literally, mate. Literally.

It's six years, and perhaps Cameron's only significant achievement will be the strong economic growth and "jobs miracle" since the Tories came in.

On the latter point, you can read what I said or just ignore it and make up a response based on what you wanted it to say. It's up to you.

[Byron]

So GS, how long does a government need to be in place before we start blaming them and not the last lot?

You seem awfully happy to blame everything on Labour when between this government and the coalition it's been 6 years. Maybe that's not long enough but I'm intrigued to know how long you intend the blame the last lot for everything wrong with the world.

[GS]

So GS, how long does a government need to be in place before we start blaming them and not the last lot?

You seem awfully happy to blame everything on Labour when between this government and the coalition it's been 6 years. Maybe that's not long enough but I'm intrigued to know how long you intend the blame the last lot for everything wrong with the world.

It depends what you're blaming them for. Which issue specifically are we addressing here?

[Henry]

LOL at delusions of Tory economic success. LOL.

[GS]

LOL at delusions of Tory economic success. LOL.

You can pretend otherwise all you want, but economically we're doing fine.

[phonics]

You can pretend otherwise all you want, but economically we're doing fine.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyB_FjsXEAAufNb.jpg

Wage growth hasn't been this bad since the great depression.

[GS]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyB_FjsXEAAufNb.jpg

Wage growth hasn't been this bad since the great depression.

We're at record levels of unemployment, and are forecast to have the highest growth in the G7 for this year.

Still, I suppose it's nice to overlook the catastrophic economic situation Labour left after their Faustian pact with the City went to shit, and budget deficits from 2002 onwards.

Then again, there is the money tree we can shake.

[niko_cee]

Wage growth since the 1700s. Now there's a meaningful analysis.

[Henry]

You can pretend otherwise all you want, but economically we're doing fine.

It's the longest period of wage stagnation in nearly a century. That's fine, is it?

And no, I'm not defending New Labour, so don't bother using them as a shield.

[Jimmy Floyd]

According to that graph, we need to go back to the days of the Duke of Portland.


Although Portland identified yet as a Whig politician, he was invited to head a Tory government. Was old and ill, leaving his Cabinet to their own devices, largely headed by his Chancellor (Spencer Perceval). Ministry destabilised through multiple disputes between the Foreign Secretary (George Canning) and the War and Colonies Secretary (Viscount Castlereagh), that eventually culminated by way of a duel; Portland resigned in response (dying 26 days after leaving office).

Sounds doozy.

[GS]

It's the longest period of wage stagnation in nearly a century. That's fine, is it?

And no, I'm not defending New Labour, so don't bother using them as a shield.

How do you suggest centralised government initiatives can address this? They're raising the minimum wage to about a tenner (let's ignore the cost push inflation impact or potential job losses so businesses can pay it).

Government should create circumstances in which business can thrive and leave them to it. They've created millions of new jobs and we're posting strong economic growth. For a government, that will do well.

The alternative is far less people in work, but you can't have everything.

[phonics]

It's been thoroughly disproved that rising wages lead to less people being employed. See LA, Seattle and (IIRC) California where they doubled the minimum wage and jobs have followed the same curve as across the rest of the nation. When people have more money, they spend it (and the working class is far, far, far more likely to spend it rather than saving it) so you need more people to serve the people that now have money.

Or you could look at Kansas where there's been widespread budget cuts, entitlements slashed and corporation tax halved 'to attract businesses' and the states economy is in crisis.

Or you could just blame Labour.

[GS]

It's been thoroughly disproved that rising wages lead to less people being employed. See LA, Seattle and (IIRC) California where they doubled the minimum wage and jobs have followed the same curve as across the rest of the nation. When people have more money, they spend it (and the working class is far, far, far more likely to spend it rather than saving it) so you need more people to serve the people that now have money.

Or you could look at Kansas where there's been widespread budget cuts, entitlements slashed and corporation tax halved 'to attract businesses' and the states economy is in crisis.

Or you could just blame Labour.

You can't compare Kansas to the UK. It's about far, far more than just a tax cut.

I would note that if you think that continuing to raise the minimum wage constantly will have no impact on job creation, then you presumably think you could just put it up to twenty quid an hour with no discernible impact. This is, clearly, wrong.

And if people are earning more, business will pass that onto the consumer meaning everybody pays more. A centrally mandated minimum wage may have some sense, where raises are staggered / staged and sensibly implemented, but the blunt truth is that some jobs aren't worth the wage that a nationally mandated minimum would require.

[Yevrah]

Give over. Given the constant right wing circlejerk on here if this was Labour you and GS would be tossing each other off about how this represents another reason Labour should stay out of power.

It's the issues that bother me, not what side of the political spectrum they fall on. I've never voted tory, for example.

[Henry]

How do you suggest centralised government initiatives can address this? They're raising the minimum wage to about a tenner (let's ignore the cost push inflation impact or potential job losses so businesses can pay it).

Government should create circumstances in which business can thrive and leave them to it. They've created millions of new jobs and we're posting strong economic growth. For a government, that will do well.

The alternative is far less people in work, but you can't have everything.

Pretty much every one of your assertions here is false.
The minimum wage is being raised next year to £7.50 per hour. That is not "about a tenner" in any universe.
There is not strong economic growth. There is tepid growth by any reasonable historical standard - lower than was predicted and it might as well be no growth for all the impact it's having on most people.
The "millions of new jobs" are mostly low-paid casual employment. It's only really job growth because they inherited a depressed economy.

But yeah, government's only job is to look after business, and as long as they do that, other metrics can be ignored and we can declare success! Great one!

You know what can be done. To put it simply, public investment and stop obsessing about deficits.

[GS]

Pretty much every one of your assertions here is false.
The minimum wage is being raised next year to £7.50 per hour. That is not "about a tenner" in any universe.
There is not strong economic growth. There is tepid growth by any reasonable historical standard - lower than was predicted and it might as well be no growth for all the impact it's having on most people.
The "millions of new jobs" are mostly low-paid casual employment. It's only really job growth because they inherited a depressed economy.

But yeah, government's only job is to look after business, and as long as they do that, other metrics can be ignored and we can declare success! Great one!

You know what can be done. To put it simply, public investment and stop obsessing about deficits.

It's going up to at least nine quid by the end of the parliament. Sustained, steady increases. If you whacked it up in one go, you'd shaft smaller businesses all over the country.

We have record levels of employment. There is a finite number of office, professional jobs needed. If we cut taxes to generate jobs here and not in, say, France, you'd accuse them of engaging in a race to the bottom. It needs private sector growth, which you don't get from taxes and regulation which are prohibitive.

In terms of looking after business, government intervention in the economy seems to be a fetish of the left. Supply side economics works.

Regardless of all this, your last point does pierce all the bullshit. You believe in the magic money tree, and you'll keep shaking it until there's nothing left.

[phonics]

The problem with infrastructure proposals is that more is spent on wanky consultants than actually making it.

[Lewis]

'Since 2008' seems like a pretty bollocks economic benchmark given that that marks the point where a decade of non-existent wealth vanished.

[Henry]

We have record levels of employment. There is a finite number of office, professional jobs needed. If we cut taxes to generate jobs here and not in, say, France, you'd accuse them of engaging in a race to the bottom. It needs private sector growth, which you don't get from taxes and regulation which are prohibitive.

You get private sector growth from sound macroeconomics. You're not interested in that.


Supply side economics works.

It does indeed work in terms of shovelling money into the pockets of business, which is all you care about, as you concede.


You believe in the magic money tree, and you'll keep shaking it until there's nothing left.

I believe that long-term deficits must be lower than long-term growth. What is the problem with that proposition?

[Boydy]

Back to the Investigatory Powers Bill - Your entire internet history to be viewable by PSNI, taxman, DWP and Food Standards Agency and other government bodies within weeks (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/technology/your-entire-internet-history-to-be-viewable-by-psni-taxman-dwp-and-food-standards-agency-and-other-government-bodies-within-weeks-35242522.html).

[Shindig]

Aye, whatevs. Incognito as fuck.

[Boydy]

I can't tell if you're joking.

[Disco]

Amongst all this do the BBC still maintain the myth of tv detector vans?

[Yevrah]

Back to the Investigatory Powers Bill - Your entire internet history to be viewable by PSNI, taxman, DWP and Food Standards Agency and other government bodies within weeks (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/technology/your-entire-internet-history-to-be-viewable-by-psni-taxman-dwp-and-food-standards-agency-and-other-government-bodies-within-weeks-35242522.html).

Yeah, ok. I'm angry now.

The taxman can't even get the BIK for my company car right, so fuck only knows what carnage they're going to bestow on me with access to my internet history.

[Boydy]

There we go. Let's funnel that Yevrage into a Yevolution.

[GS]

'Since 2008' seems like a pretty bollocks economic benchmark given that that marks the point where a decade of non-existent wealth vanished.

Indeed. Wage increases, asset price increases etc. were founded on assumptions built on air. It's hardly surprising that there has been a consequent stagnation whilst the market ceases shitting itself and some sense of order is restored.


You get private sector growth from sound macroeconomics. You're not interested in that.

It does indeed work in terms of shovelling money into the pockets of business, which is all you care about, as you concede.

I believe that long-term deficits must be lower than long-term growth. What is the problem with that proposition?

You get private sector growth by removing barriers to entry, and encouraging investment. You achieve this by reducing regulation, thus making it easier for smaller businesses, particularly micro-businesses which comprised 96% of all businesses in the UK in 2014. You also achieve this by reducing corporation tax to allow said businesses to keep more of their profits for reinvestment, growth therefrom, and thus further job creation.

Most businesses struggle to get off the ground, and making it difficult for them is a waste of everybody's time. With respect to larger business, this is a global market and the UK must compete - both for direct FDI and to retain business within their own jurisdiction. See Ireland - the leading recipient of FDI in Europe, with the majority of businesses investing therein citing the taxation regime (whether the headline CT rate or R&D reliefs) as key reasons. Ireland obviously benefits from other factors (e.g. good transport links through Dublin Airport / the port of Dublin, English speaking, strong talent pool of labour) which means you couldn't replicate the effect in, say, Lithuania - but the UK has this also, and should definitely be competing on tax levels post-Brexit through further cuts to CT.

If you want to think that prohibitive taxation levels, increased cost exposure through top-down national minimums (e.g. ever-increasing minimum wages, increasing maternity pay), excessive regulation, and increased barriers to entry - alongside continued government interference to 'correct' the direction of the economy and thus stifle innovation and economic flexibility - are a recipe for economic success, and will result in thirty million people sitting in air-conditioned offices with a latte on the desk beside them then fine.

[niko_cee]

The Right to Remain!

:D

Someone should really ask (challenge) the likes of Farron as to what type of deal he would be happy to sign off on.

[GS]

Back to the Investigatory Powers Bill - Your entire internet history to be viewable by PSNI, taxman, DWP and Food Standards Agency and other government bodies within weeks (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/technology/your-entire-internet-history-to-be-viewable-by-psni-taxman-dwp-and-food-standards-agency-and-other-government-bodies-within-weeks-35242522.html).

It's a shambles, but there's a clear direction of travel on this within government circles irrespective of which party is in office.

[GS]

The Right to Remain!

:D

Someone should really ask (challenge) the likes of Farron as to what type of deal he would be happy to sign off on.

He'll sign off nothing - his entire pitch is that the Lib Dems are the party for the 48%, and that entails refusing to agree to anything Brexit-related. Ideally it'll bring annihilation at the next election, insofar as that's possible when you only have a minivan's worth of MPs.

[niko_cee]

Well, yes, that was my point. The actual position of most 'parliament must have a say' remain folk is that anything short of full EU membership is unacceptable, and would be voted down. Which is fine, but they should be made to acknowledge the fundamental juxtaposition that an elected official holding such a view represents.

[Boydy]

It's a shambles, but there's a clear direction of travel on this within government circles irrespective of which party is in office.
Is there anything you won't give the Tories a pass on?

[Lewis]

The Anglo-Irish Agreement.

[GS]

Is there anything you won't give the Tories a pass on?

I'm far from giving them a pass on it. The Lord Blair wanted to lock people up for 90 days without trial. I assume they sit down to their first MI5 briefing and suddenly shit themselves that they'll be held responsible if something goes wrong and they'll be accused of "not doing anything to stop it!".

There can be no other explanation for such collective bed-shitting / groupthink.

[GS]

The Anglo-Irish Agreement.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9uHhLe6WE0

We've won, though. The Union is safe.

[Lewis]

Speaking of which, I lolled at Tony Blair saying he couldn't come back because the media would be out to get him. Yeah, mate. Yeah.

[GS]

It's quite interesting watching him agitate from the sidelines about possible ways to block it. It's almost as if he doesn't have the self-awareness to realise his own role in the circumstances leading to a leave vote.

[phonics]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyFrfs6XAAAuBYK.jpg:large

Seems legit.

[Jimmy Floyd]

The Litvinenko case is murky as fuck. If it was any other country we'd have sent their ambassador home and all sorts.

[John Arne]

Interesting decision to visit Russia after previously working on a case to take down one of their spies.

[Disco]

"Accidentally brutally cut his head off while combing his hair."

[Jimmy Floyd]

The picture two thirds of the way down this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38089469) made me think - Trump, 'Milo', Wilders. Why do they all have fucking weird bottle blonde hair?

Boris's isn't weird or artificial enough to qualify.

[Henry]

Listening to some shit yesterday - apparently the banning of letting agent fees is a great thing. So that's something and Hammond > Gideon.

[Boydy]

Yeah, that is good.

It's a drop in the ocean in terms of the UK's fucked housing market though.

[Jimmy Floyd]

I was looking at flats etc yesterday as at my age I should be moving out of home. Unless I want to move to Middlesbrough where there are no jobs, I'm looking at £500pm to live in a shoebox, £750+ if I want dignity. I'd therefore need to add about 25% to my salary overnight. I pay my mother £350 to stay at home.

I'm under the national average wage, but not by a lot. Something must be fundamentally broken. Brexit should help this actually.

[Disco]

You also live in a ludicrously expensive area of the country when it comes to that sort of thing.

[Henry]

The "average" salary is apparently £27,000 but I imagine that's distorted by those at the upper end, so the median would be a bit lower.

[Jimmy Floyd]

You also live in a ludicrously expensive area of the country when it comes to that sort of thing.

Expensive but also jobs-rich and with high wages, so moving would not really be beneficial even before you start thinking about being near family/friends etc.

[Shindig]

The North-East average is £18,000. I'm under that. You could see how many Koreans would fit in that shoebox.

Also, John Major is getting some unwarranted criticism for his brexit talk.

[Kikó]

I'm over the average wage and am nowhere near saving for it unless I move somewhere in the Midlands.

[Shindig]

One of the benefits of being raised by skint, tight parents is that, once I got in work, I kept saving and never spent much. Been working for six years and have £30k together.

[phonics]

This description of the upper echleons on 9/11 is wonderfully British.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyiWlPGWgAAwNeN.jpg:large

[Sam]

I'm over the average wage and am nowhere near saving for it unless I move somewhere in the Midlands.

I'm plowing my years into milking London before going back to Wolverhampton and scooping a mansion up. The price disparity is astounding

[phonics]

Zac Goldsmith betting that he could get away with pretending he wasn't a Conservative anymore only to lose to a Lib Dem. Lol.

[Lewis]

I love by-election victory speeches. The pressure is really on to make the most of your thirty seconds of relevance.

'The poshest people in the wankiest part of the country have sent a message...'

Oh shit mate better slam the brakes on. Please forgive us Belgium.

[Jimmy Floyd]

I'd forgotten how awful Lib Dems are when they win. Let this not become a regular occurrence. I'd be spinning it as a very poor result for them, mind, they should be absolutely pissing Richmond in a by election.

[GS]

Renzi has been hammered in the constitutional referendum in Italy, almost certainly meaning he'll have to resign.

Well played, mate.

[Henry]

Doesn't that trigger some sort of chain of events that might lead Italy to leave the Euro or something?

[GS]

If he resigns and there are new elections, the Five Star movement might win. They've been useless when they've won power (see Raggi in Rome), but it's not like that matters.

The Five Star movement want to have a referendum on leaving the single currency. Which the Italians should be doing because a) they've had 0% growth in their economy since 2000 (there's 40% youth unemployment and you might as well sink everything south of Rome into the Mediterranean) and the single currency means they can't devalue to make exports competitive and b) their banks are sitting with €286bn of bad loans which they're, technically, not allowed to have the government bail out. If the banks collapse, it could lead to a run in the Eurozone.

That said, it's great for us because in the event that there are problems in the Eurozone they'll get nowhere by making things difficult for us (i.e. themselves).

[Lewis]

If the European Union collapses (https://i.sli.mg/lPQ2dd.jpg) before we leave then we should keep it going on our own like Roger Waters. Then we can invite who we like on our terms. :drool:

[GS]

If the European Union collapses (https://i.sli.mg/lPQ2dd.jpg) before we leave then we should keep it going on our own like Roger Waters. Then we can invite who we like on our terms. :drool:

The EU will only collapse if Le Pen wins in France. If she wins, there'd be a referendum on "Frexit" and a decent chance that it would win. The Germans are morbidly attached to it, because it allows them to dominate Europe without having to send the Wehrmacht in. We need the French to bring it down.

The Italians may be the third biggest Eurozone economy, but they're basically a non-country at this point. Sixty-three odd governments since WWII.

[Lewis]

'We need the French to...' Oh well. Never mind.

[GS]

'We need the French to...' Oh well. Never mind.

WWI broke them. It's unfortunate, but c'est la vie.

805549835675992064

The absolute state of that. Renzi is resigning. :drool:

[Magic]

Euro just dropped in value. €1.20 to the pound now. I'm sure this shit coincides with my holidays. Bastards.

[Lewis]

It's quite impressive how Italy burbles along without actually falling to bits.

[GS]

In principle, Renzi's reforms were sensible enough - certainly a step in the right direction. Italy isn't far off ungovernable. You only have to look at the state of its economy, the laughable divide between north and south and the number of governments it's had since we rolled the Germans back.

His mistake was making it personal; that is, almost a vote of 'confidence' in him. He's fucked it up himself, because he invited this. The margin of the defeat is so vast as to be almost impossible to come back from.

At this stage, you'd be better going back to 1495 - reconstitute the papal states and hand the newly-reformed Kingdom of Naples (and surrounding territories) to the Spanish.

[Jimmy Floyd]

It's one of those countries (like Spain, and Portugal) where some of it is a third world cesspit and some of it is alright, and ne'er the twain shall meet. Our shit bits at least have some sort of history of doing something.

[ItalAussie]

Why do you lot care about the EU collapsing anymore? You're well out of it now.

Seems like base spite, and nothing better.

[Lewis]

Imagine if the 2022 World Cup ends up being the biggest sporting disaster of all time. We'll all be lolling, and the idiots in charge of it will be seething.

It's like that, but funnier.

[GS]

Why do you lot care about the EU collapsing anymore? You're well out of it now.

Seems like base spite, and nothing better.

Because it's an anti-democratic mess that is more interested in maintaining 'the rules' and amassing further power to itself. Its policies will continue to leave millions floundering, and smaller countries will be perpetually shafted by a single currency (and German domination thereof) which makes them internationally uncompetitive. They're basically German satellite states. Which is fine, but probably not conducive to continued long-term support for THE PROJECT.

I also have strong concerns about the role of any common EU 'defence' policy and its overlap with NATO. It doesn't need one, basically, but it's determined to have one so it can have all the trappings of a federalist system which nobody in Europe has, in fact, ever voted for (yet, anyway).

You need only look at the reaction of Brexit to see the bubble these people live in.

[phonics]

if theresa may is to be believed, someone’s about to get fired.
the embattled uk prime minister is keen to eliminate leaks from within her government, and willing to take serious measures to do so, according to a nov. 28 memo (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3998090/panic-no10-cabinet-brexit-leaks-theresa-orders-sir-cover-spy-senior-ministers-threatens-sack-culprits-reveal-inside-secrets.html) from cabinet secretary sir jeremy heywood to senior officials.

“leaking is corrosive and undermines trust and good government,” heywood wrote. “leaks are never acceptable but the regularity and cumulative impact of recent incidents mean we must now collectively take exceptional action. The prime minister has directed that we urgently tighten security processes and improve our response to leaks.”

by dec. 1, the memo—distributed in hard copy instead of by email—had been leaked to the daily mail.

in the memo, heywood said leaders who think leaks “are the necessary cost of open ways…are mistaken,” and that “anyone found to have leaked sensitive information will be dismissed, even when there is no compromise of national security.” he noted that may would be informing ministers of the same.

the note outlined other crackdown measures, including requiring all ministers and officials to use government-supplied mobile phones and empowering security chiefs to seize the phones and email records of suspected leakers.

may’s edict comes as she continues to negotiate britain’s complicated exit from the european union. One recent directive (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/stop-referring-to-boris-johnson-ministers-edict-a7454866.html) to ministers, also leaked to the mail, said that jokes perpetuating foreign secretary boris johnson’s “cabinet clown” reputation were making it impossible for him to do his job. As a solution, the memo instructed ministers to no longer refer to him as “boris.”

:D

[Lewis]

Because it's an anti-democratic mess that is more interested in maintaining 'the rules' and amassing further power to itself. Its policies will continue to leave millions floundering, and smaller countries will be perpetually shafted by a single currency (and German domination thereof) which makes them internationally uncompetitive. They're basically German satellite states. Which is fine, but probably not conducive to continued long-term support for THE PROJECT.

I also have strong concerns about the role of any common EU 'defence' policy and its overlap with NATO. It doesn't need one, basically, but it's determined to have one so it can have all the trappings of a federalist system which nobody in Europe has, in fact, ever voted for (yet, anyway).

You need only look at the reaction of Brexit to see the bubble these people live in.

Or: Nick Clegg will be annoyed so lol.

[GS]

Or: Nick Clegg will be annoyed so lol.

That too. He was properly seething on Sunday Politics earlier when Brillo was pulling him apart.

[Vim]

In principle, Renzi's reforms were sensible enough - certainly a step in the right direction. Italy isn't far off ungovernable. You only have to look at the state of its economy, the laughable divide between north and south and the number of governments it's had since we rolled the Germans back.

His mistake was making it personal; that is, almost a vote of 'confidence' in him. He's fucked it up himself, because he invited this. The margin of the defeat is so vast as to be almost impossible to come back from.

At this stage, you'd be better going back to 1495 - reconstitute the papal states and hand the newly-reformed Kingdom of Naples (and surrounding territories) to the Spanish.

He shouldn't have said that he'd resign if NO won. He gave everyone who didn't like him the chance to vote to kick him out regardless of what the referendum was about.

I voted YES but I was not too convinced by it, either. I don't really mind either side winning, now we'll see when the elections happen. Technical government (is that what it's called in English?) until then, possibly the elections will be after the financial law in September.

[Jimmy Floyd]

We don't need a word for it in English.

[niko_cee]

:D

Mario Monti rides again!

As to base spite, perhaps we just don't like seeing Germany ride roughshod over the lesser nations of Europe? It's not like we (and they) don't have form.

[phonics]

http://i.imgur.com/6jl7eg0.png

She is literally the worst.

[GS]

She's not pitching for your support. That's language aimed at voters sympathetic to UKIP, who she can win by showing that she's a) committed to Brexit, and b) isn't embarrassed about patriotism.

[Lewis]

Just tell them we're off, love (and preferably trash the gaff on your way out). Anything less than that is a BETRAYAL.

[phonics]

Not sure how UKIP are going to be convinced by having a French Brexit.

[GS]

Moving on from such trivia, Labour have a motion tomorrow calling on the government to publish its plan for Brexit negotiations before Article 50 is triggered. Which is fine isn't it, as "plan" is so vague that you could spend an entire parliamentary session debating what the scope is.

The government have accepted an amended version of the motion. Theresa May has proposed an amendment which tacks on "...that this House will respect the wishes of the UK as expressed in the referendum of the 23rd June; and further calls on the government to invoke Article 50 by 31 March 2017."

In effect, it means that anybody voting to see "the plan" is also explicitly going to have to back both a) the principle of Brexit, and b) the plan to invoke Article 50 by the end of March.

I assume she's sent Keir "Sir Keir" Starmer a picture of a massive troll face. It's rather cleverly done, because it turns the whole debate from seeing "the plan" (as Labour intended) into a straight up or down on whether or not they support implementing the referendum result and getting on with it. They'll presumably take anybody who votes against it and be able to paint them as 'blocking Brexit', which'll place your average non-London Labour MP in difficulty.

[niko_cee]

It's pretty petty is what it is.

This is even more interminable than the build up to the referendum. The EU had the right idea with the no talking until we talk shtick, but unfortunately they haven't been able to stop mouthing off since the inception of that policy.

Just send John Redwood in. Do you want to trade with us? Our proposal is we continue to do so. You can keep the rest. What's your's Monsieur?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Guy Verhofstadt's twitter is probably the official end point of Europe's 600 years on top.

Brexit looking a better shout by the day meanwhile as Europe falls in on itself.

[GS]

I think they still believe we'll just not bother if they make it difficult enough. It probably doesn't help that certain sections of the populace appear to be in a state of deep and prolonged mourning over the result.

[phonics]

edit: Damn can't link the whole thing

Read this for an excellent takedown of IDS' article in the Mail on THOSE EVIL JUDGES RAPING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THIS FINE NATION

https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret

[GS]

The court case is irrelevant. If it loses, the commons will vote for it. The lords may want to block it, but it would be a pyrrhic victory if they did so as May would call an election on lords reform and ruin them.

[phonics]

Watching this:

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/353f9224-e34b-4f1b-ab00-5d4c09c7a28d?in=16:31:10&out=16:38:45

And realising that Brexit is very much the real term. Anyone remember when the largest recession since The Great Depression was referred to FOR MONTHS as 'The Credit Crunch'

How does this happen?

[Shindig]

If you're going to be saying something a lot, you need a shorthand. The Squeezed Middle, Cost of Living Crisis, Living Wage, etc ...

[Jimmy Floyd]

Long term economic plan.

What's Theresa May's version?

[Jimmy Floyd]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CzF12okXgAAHCtH.jpg

I'm not sure Maidenhead can cope.

[Boydy]

I thought Mensch had fucked off to America? Is she back?

[John]

Will Self and Farage in the same room will end the world in a puff of smug.

[phonics]

Long term economic plan.

What's Theresa May's version?

Brexit means Brexit/Breakfast depending on how hungover the MP is on the day.

[Offshore Toon]

Will Self and Farage in the same room will end the world in a puff of smug.
At least Kiko won't be there.

[GS]

The levels of smug on that panel are going to be off the scale.

Farage should just light a cigar, and lie back with his feet on the desk for the duration of the programme.

[Henry]

Good panel, I'll watch that.

Boris being smacked down for saying something that is allegedly "controversial" about Saudi Arabia but should be anything but, I see. Fucking twats.

[Spikey M]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38248316
"Downing Street has said Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson's comments on Saudi Arabiado not represent "the government's position"."

Beyond satire, really. Outstanding.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Tom Brake, the Lib Dems' foreign affairs spokesman, said: "This will be a huge embarrassment to May as she returns from her grubby tour of the Gulf, where she did her best to ignore human rights and desperately push trade at all costs."

Thank fuck the remaining Lib Dems will never get near government again.

[Boydy]

Why? What's wrong with what he's said there?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Sounds like he doesn't want us to trade. We're a country, not a religion, moral purity is impossible.

[Henry]

Since when does stating the fucking obvious in quite a reasoned and subtle way (listen to all of what Boris said) anything to do with "moral purity"?

Is it government position to deny that the Saudi's and Iran are involved in sponsoring proxies against each other and that this leads to no good?

[leedsrevolution]

But we want out BRITAIN BACK? Right?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Since when does stating the fucking obvious in quite a reasoned and subtle way (listen to all of what Boris said) anything to do with "moral purity"?

Is it government position to deny that the Saudi's and Iran are involved in sponsoring proxies against each other and that this leads to no good?

Oh Boris is spot on, but it's the sort of thing you or I can say, not the Foreign Secretary.

[Lewis]

Thank fuck the remaining Lib Dems will never get near government again.

Foreign Affairs Spokesman, and he also moonlights as their Chief Whip. Why?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Their new positioning as the unrepentant Party of Remain is going to be rather undermined when we leave.

[Lewis]

'Twenty-eight countries, coming together in the continental interest...'

[GS]

Oh Boris is spot on, but it's the sort of thing you or I can say, not the Foreign Secretary.

Whilst probably true, I do find it difficult to get overly worked up about it. It'd be different if it wasn't both obvious and accurate. The bigger question is how this impacts the relationship between May and her senior ministers. There's only so long her constantly slapping them down can go on.

[Jimmy Floyd]

I was in Waterstones earlier looking for books to get my old man for Christmas (got him one about the Lancaster bomber in the end) and what should be in the political section than a single very thick volume of memoirs by Norman Lamb, the cover picture for which is him wearing a huge yellow scarf. I mean, come on, geez.

Didn't see anything by Dr Evan Harris.

[GS]

What possible interest could the memoirs of Norman Lamb hold to the general public?

[Lewis]

I've got Julian Huppert's The Man Who Would Be King on my Amazon wishlist.

[Yevrah]

How can this Labour twat still not understand the rules of engagement over the TIME award?

[GS]

Because expressing outrage is what the left do. Constantly, and at every opportunity.

[7om]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38305413

He's back :cool:

Just a shame he's shitting on his time in the cabinet.

[Lewis]

It was an idiotic speech that 1) ignores our involvement in making it last this long; and 2) blames Iraq for putting everybody off, rather than more recent examples of 'Western leadership' in Libya. These people are fucking deranged.

[Jimmy Floyd]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38319283

I don't understand this. They've spent the last 25 years going on about 'needing to reflect the communities we serve', then introduce a ruling that means no police force will ever again do so.

[ItalAussie]

Whose idea was that? How pointless.

[Yeldoow]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38319283

I don't understand this. They've spent the last 25 years going on about 'needing to reflect the communities we serve', then introduce a ruling that means no police force will ever again do so.

If they can do it as an apprenticeship I don't why it would be a barrier to anyone wanting to be Police Officer. It would just take 3 years to go from apprentice to a full fledged officer, and presumably end up with better qualified police officers (in theory).

The whole thing might turn out to be complete shit, but the idea doesn't seem bad in principle. They're not saying that only university graduates can be police officers.

[niko_cee]

They probably need to create a market for the millions of people with completely pointless £30k degree qualifications.

In other political news, this:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/14/do-retail-workers-know-its-christmas-labour-mps-record-protest-charity-single

Is beyond brilliant.

[Yevrah]

Fuck.Ing.Hell

That's up there with the policy obelisk.

[Byron]

:face:

[Yevrah]

I love as well how MP's just jump on whatever cause bandwagon is flavour of the month and nauseate the life out of it.

Christmas working in retail has always been shit, this isn't a new thing.

[7om]

Labour :drool:

It's actually pretty decent comedy value at this point.

[niko_cee]

Fuck.Ing.Hell

That's up there with the policy obelisk.

:D

This was my exact reaction as well.

You can just see the fresh faced spags coming up with the idea, with no one there to point out the (massive) potential pitfalls of hijacking a song about starvation/famine in Africa to complain about first world employment practices.


Labour's press office insisted it was the MPs' personal decision to record the song and stressed it "has nothing to do with the Labour party".

[Yevrah]

Indeed. Alastair Campbell must be despairing on an almost hourly basis these days.

[Jimmy Floyd]

When you're stacking all the bottles on the shelves
Wearing stupid hats, like Santa, or his elves
Are you on six quid an hour? Do you think it's shitty pay?
Do you wish the Labour cunts would go away
So here it is...

[7om]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38327411

[Shindig]

Give me enough gunpowder and I'll sort this state out.

[phonics]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38327411

Best part


And, until 1998, any MP wishing to raise a point of order during a division was required to wear a top hat. Special collapsible versions were kept for this purpose.

[Lewis]

Michael Sheen (out of impressions) is moving back to Wales to make a stand against Literally Hitler, and I'm torn between thinking fair play mate (although he's probably just sick of listening to Sarah Silverman) and lolling at him being that dramatic.

[Boydy]

Sarah Silverman's like the dream. Funny, hot, Jewish. Ticks all the boxes.

[Lewis]

'Where you going? You haven't done the washing up. You haven't put the rubbish out...'
'DO IT YOURSELF I'VE GOTTA SAVE SOME STEELWORKERS!

[phonics]

He's married to Sarah Silverman? I thought she was with one of those late show hosts.

[Shindig]

Sarah Silverman's like the dream. Funny, hot, Jewish. Ticks all the boxes.

You had 'Jewish' as a box?

I also wanted to make an incredibly ill-conceived 'hot Jew joke' but I'll abort on that one.

[Boydy]

Yeah.

[phonics]

Both yay and lol

811504109476052992

[Lewis]

Italy is bailing one of its banks out, which goes against the stated European policy of only bailing in when they are literally minutes away from death (the idea being that the stakeholders take the hit, rather than the state), which is itself designed to prevent countries racking up huge debts saving their banks and then asking Germany to cover them. If they get away with that, the principle is then [re]established that Greece or whoever can do whatever is necessary to kick things back into gear and expect others to fork out for it.

lol

[niko_cee]

Isn't the whole of the Italian banking sector (lol) fucked because they've essentially lent billions to the mafia, who's response to be asking to repay is the standard Fat Tony "what billions?"

[Lewis]

I would like that to be true.

[Pepe]

Isn't anything prefaced by Italian 'lol'?

[Kikó]

Italy is fucked because they have no monetary control. They need to leave the Euro.

[GS]

Isn't the whole of the Italian banking sector (lol) fucked because they've essentially lent billions to the mafia, who's response to be asking to repay is the standard Fat Tony "what billions?"

That and a continual build-up of bad debts they're inevitably going to have to write off. They should be allowed to fail, given it'll happen on account of their own gross incompetence.


Italy is fucked because they have no monetary control. They need to leave the Euro.

I agree. The problem is that the powers that be will never, ever concede the point on the single currency.

For the Italians to leave - not just threaten to do so, but to actually do so without causing a panic over what's left of their economy - would require acceptance that the single currency is a failed project and much of the economic malaise infesting the southern member states is a direct consequence of it. They've basically impoverished the Greeks and imposed lol-worthy bail-out conditions on the likes of Ireland because they're enslaved to Eurocrat dogma on the single currency. To let anybody leave because the grass is perceived as greener would be akin to accepting that it's all been a gigantic vanity project and thus a complete waste of everybody's time.

The bigger issue for the Italians, separate from the Euro, is that it's basically ungovernable in any meaningful way. We're at, what, sixty-four governments since the republic was restored? They probably need to develop a political system that isn't absolutely shit.

All of that said, I do want to see one of these countries put their balls on the table and withdraw from it. It's the only thing that's going to restore some sense of economic vitality to some of these countries, and that can only be a good thing. If it leaves to the complete collapse of the Euro itself, all the better.

[Jimmy Floyd]

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/leave-voters-heroes-2016/

Thanks, mate.

I too, in certain circumstances, lie to people that I voted Remain. It's just not worth the hassle. I don't believe political views have any importance in personal relationships, but apparently many people do.

[Pepe]

We only associate with people that think like us nowadays mate.

[Spikey M]

https://twitter.com/booshyharris/status/813256513162604544?s=01

[Jimmy Floyd]

Dominic Cummings has posted an absolutely mega blog post, for those who like referendummy things.

[Lewis]

What a legend. His little feud with Matthew Goodwin is pretty lol as well.

[Jimmy Floyd]

It really is remarkable how big a cunt Aaron Banks is.

[Jimmy Floyd]

This is actually one of the greatest things I've ever read.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Finally finished it. Link for anyone who has a spare 36 hours or so: https://dominiccummings.wordpress.com/

It turns out he's actually the most brilliant man in British politics in the last 40 years, if only the Remain tosspots had realised that.

[Yevrah]

24,972 words. :eyemouth:

[Jimmy Floyd]

7. One of my basic criticisms of Cameron/Osborne from the start was the way they steered by pundit. During the 2015 election Crosby partly corrected this and they partly learned the lesson. But left to their own devices in the referendum when under pressure they defaulted to their instincts at a crucial moment. The reaction to the dreadful murder was an example of how the media and SW1 can live effectively in a parallel universe. Somehow they convinced themselves that this event might undo over a decade of growing hostility for those in power. They therefore tried to push the theme that actually MPs are great, ‘they are in it for good reasons’ and so on. The media led themselves into a dead end and No10, defaulting to their instincts of steering by pundit, followed. As soon as I saw Osborne and Matt Hancock wasting their time tweeting broken multicoloured hearts and encouraging #weloveourMP, I knew they had screwed their own OODA loop. We knew from focus groups (conducted by the brilliant Henry de Zoete who also played a crucial role in coordinating the digital and data science teams) that opinion outside London was extremely different to that of MPs and those in charge of most news. We went straight back to what we knew were the winning messages leaving Hancock and co to tweet broken hearts.

This paragraph neatly sums up his savant qualities.

[Lewis]

In other news, what does Martin McGuinness expect to happen in this election he has forced, and what does that stupid woman expect to happen if she clings on?

[Jimmy Floyd]

More political masterstrokes from the great Jeremy tonight I see. Someone buy that man a pint.

[Raoul Duke]

More political masterstrokes from the great Jeremy tonight I see. Someone buy that man a pint.

He doesn't have a fucking clue. Total time waster.

[Luke Emia]

Are you talking about the fact he has said there should be a cap on the amount that people should earn? Or the fact he said he's not wedded to the idea of free movement? The earnings one has to be one the single most mental things I have ever heard any politician come out with. Go on then Jeremy, how much are we allowed to earn as a maximum?

[Mellberg]

In principal (reducing inequality) he's on the money. Unfortunately he's coming across like a commie git again, although I can't imagine many CEOs were pro-Corbyn before today.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Inequality has actually been falling in this country since about 1992.

[phonics]

Much like Universal Income, it's one of those policies that makes you feel good but won't work. To be fair to him, he also said he'd only implement it if he could get a global agreement on it as it'd be pointless otherwise. I guess you could technically make it a pre-requisite of being listed on the 5 major markets? (FTSE, NASDAQ etc.)

[Boydy]

Pay ratios would be a better policy. The CEO can have as much as he wants but then the workers have to be paid a lot more too.

[Mellberg]

I've not seen any figures specific to the UK (feel free to share), although the old 99% wealth/1% population figure makes me laugh like Walter White in a crawlspace, so I'm not too arsed if it's creeping up or down. We need major reform.

[phonics]

Pay ratios would be a better policy. The CEO can have as much as he wants but then the workers have to be paid a lot more too.

From what I gathered from the interviews (haven't heard the Today show, only read it) I think that's what it was referring to but it also sound like he just agreed to support the policy when John Humphrey's brought it up rather than it being an actual idea.

[Jimmy Floyd]

I've not seen any figures specific to the UK (feel free to share), although the old 99% wealth/1% population figure makes me laugh like Walter White in a crawlspace, so I'm not too arsed if it's creeping up or down. We need major reform.

Will never happen. If you want to know why, just get a train to central London and walk around for a day.

[phonics]

818847940840161284

Ah so that's how he gets round it. It would mean the utter destruction of G4S so I'm all for it.

[phonics]

"No company will receive taxpayer-funded contracts if it, or its parent company, is headquartered in a tax haven,"

G4S would be literally dead. I'm on the Jez train again.

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/12036419_10156113989240381_3517923424508633605_n.j pg?oh=a10f85503cf4e75751d3967c86410b72&oe=5920E019

[Lewis]

He seems to be all over the place today, which, rather than being surrounded by idiots, can only be down to him being a bit of a thick cunt himself.

[phonics]

It's the new 'rebrand' (lol). They should have had him get the beard back first. Like Clarence Royce in reverse.

[Jimmy Floyd]

This is probably why he disappears for weeks at a time. Anyone competent would have easily taken down Hunt and Truss by now.

[Lewis]

He could have RELAUNCHED with free sex robots for all, and it would only get pissed up the wall when he starts talking about immigration.

[Raoul Duke]

In principal (reducing inequality) he's on the money. Unfortunately he's coming across like a commie git again, although I can't imagine many CEOs were pro-Corbyn before today.

It's just unenforceable bollocks. Anyone who earns anything mega would simply switch their salary to stock options or something to get around it. It also wouldn't fix the issue, as it's an entirely arbitrary thing. My CEO earns about £400k - is that too much? How about someone on £50k? Compared to a cleaner in Gwynedd that's shitloads. Jezza himself earns about £130k.

It's also not just the fact that he's saying this insane stuff, it's that a) it seems entirely off-the-cuff and b) this was a couple of days before he's due to give a major speech, of which the central theme was immigration - now he'll spend the time dealing with this. It's fucking amateurish and we need someone with their shit together to make some kind of sustainable, long-term plan for the country

[Lewis]

There is no such thing.

[Yevrah]

I've been listening to a fair bit of James O'Brien on Corbyn recently and he really does nail his shortcomings and not even by pointing them out.

[Boydy]

It's just unenforceable bollocks. Anyone who earns anything mega would simply switch their salary to stock options or something to get around it. It also wouldn't fix the issue, as it's an entirely arbitrary thing. My CEO earns about £400k - is that too much? How about someone on £50k? Compared to a cleaner in Gwynedd that's shitloads. Jezza himself earns about £130k.

It's also not just the fact that he's saying this insane stuff, it's that a) it seems entirely off-the-cuff and b) this was a couple of days before he's due to give a major speech, of which the central theme was immigration - now he'll spend the time dealing with this. It's fucking amateurish and we need someone with their shit together to make some kind of sustainable, long-term plan for the country

Just tax capital gains at like 90% then. :drool:


But yeah, he should be hammering the Tories on the NHS at the minute and instead he's come up with this which will make the headlines and distract from that.

[Lewis]

I always wonder how long James O'Brien spends perfecting his act in front of the mirror.

[Yevrah]

I always wonder how long James O'Brien spends perfecting his act in front of the mirror.

Quite a lot I'd imagine. I do like him though.

[phonics]

Oi Kiko, get Lee to give us an NHS update.

[randomlegend]

It's all fucked.

[Jimmy Floyd]

If only Boris had become PM instead of SkeleWitch, it would (genuinely) have an extra £100 million a week. Although I'm not sure money will actually solve much.

[Lewis]

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/01/12/i-can-t-reach-out-to-brexiters-anymore-they-re-destroying-th

Poor bloke. :(

[Jimmy Floyd]

More classic Melvyn Bragg And That thinking. If I like something, it's because it's right; if you like something, it's because it's populist. If I don't like something, I'm standing up for my principles; if you don't like something, you're being divisive.

Also, all this talk about 'plans' is absolutely stupid. No one has ever had a 'plan' about anything. You can't 'plan' a country. You steer it.

[Lewis]

The best (and obviously most under-reported) bit of that endlessly quotable Dominic Cummings blog was the extent to which collective gayness powered the remain vote.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year. The former tend to see such questions in more general and abstract terms, and are more insulated from immediate worries about money. The latter tend to see such questions in more concrete and specific terms and ask ‘how does this affect me?’. The former live amid the emotional waves that ripple around powerful and tightly linked self-reinforcing networks. These waves rarely permeate the barrier around insiders and touch others.

:drool:

[Lewis]

It's the gift that keeps on giving, and it's almost worth having it sabotaged just to see what sort of SEETHE Nigel Farage can mobilise.

[Boydy]

I'm not sure you can really argue that leave voters were asking 'how will this affect me?' in terms of money.

Thus is quite good on why remainers and leavers don't really get each other, I think: http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2017/01/brexit-as-identity-politics.html

[Lewis]

I would like to have been there when he came to that startling realisation. I bet it was prompted by somebody turning down a glass of wine.

'I spent forty-five minutes picking this out. The man in the shop said...'
*sulks on it all weekend*

[Jimmy Floyd]

'Consequentialist' is an even worse way of declaring yourself the superior being than 'progressive'.

[Alan Shearer The 2nd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ILL1XRLVuA

Short version here-

https://twitter.com/GSpellchecker/status/819640154545680384

:harold:

[Lewis]

I saw that earlier, and it's the David Brentesque 'Well' at 5:22 that sets it apart.

[Alan Shearer The 2nd]

:nod:

[Jimmy Floyd]

Tristram Hunt quitting to become director of the V&A. How perfect is that. Stoke by-election incoming.

[Lewis]

Remember that brief period where all of our cultural institutions being in Labour hands was seen as a big deal (until the coalition came into being and started taking it up the arse)? Hopefully once the Brexit Revolution gets underway, and we start catapulting foreigners out, UKIP activists will break into museums and universities and batter remain supporters to death.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Prominent Remainers having to barricade themselves into crap London museums on £200,000 a year is too good to be true, really.

[Lewis]

It's easy to see how Team Jezza gets paranoid when ITV News makes out that they have lost a future Prime Minister. Who ever thought that other than himself? The story should be how a middling academic with ten minutes of wholly-ineffectual political experience is qualified to run one of the biggest museums in the world.

[niko_cee]

For quite a long time I thought Tristram Hunt was a made up satirical figure and short of a high ranking role at the bbc this seems to fit that imagined narrative quite well.

[Disco]

You're thinking of Tristram Shandy, which what I do every time I hear his name.

[Lewis]

820232638468411392

:gs:

[Jimmy Floyd]

I don't think Mrs Brown's Boys is as bad as people say it is, so I must be a true Briton.

[Lewis]

It's alright. But then I could just be making myself like it because that's what Clement Attlee would have done.

[Boydy]

Stop lying to yourselves.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Leaving the single market, leaving the customs union and leaving the ECJ :drool:

We are donning it so hard.

[Lewis]

Brexit means Brexit. In other news... (https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/820330589983297537) :harold:

[Raoul Duke]

820335121408688128

[Lewis]

And bear in mind that there is still the £350 million a week to come.

[Boydy]

I wish there was someone in the Labour Party who was similarly-minded to Corbyn but had some charisma and a sense of humour. Is that really too much to ask?

[Jimmy Floyd]

John McDonnell?

Or Diane Abbott.

[Lewis]

The communist sense of humour died with Tito.

[GS]

Leaving the single market, leaving the customs union and leaving the ECJ :drool:

We are donning it so hard.

Hammond has an interview in the German press today where he's tacitly threatening to turn us into a European Singapore to ensure our competitiveness if the EU seek to limit access. Barnier has also acknowledged privately that the Eurozone will require some sort of the deal with the City to ensure the stability of the financial markets.

Heavy pro-Brexit votes in these by-elections would be timely to continue the generally positive narrative.


I wish there was someone in the Labour Party who was similarly-minded to Corbyn but had some charisma and a sense of humour. Is that really too much to ask?

Bit rich complaining about his incompetence when you voted for him. It's not as if this wasn't always going to be what happened.

[Boydy]

He's still better than any of the other useless twats who stood.

[Jimmy Floyd]

I imagine long term it'll involve them morphing into a shit version of the French Socialist Party, which is itself fucking shit and at the point of death. Well done, Miliband.

[GS]

It's quite interesting reading the reaction to the pre-released quotes of May's speech tomorrow - it's as if they haven't paid any attention whatever to what she's said over the last few months.

This is also an interesting poll, somewhat torpedoing the myth that the people are incredibly worked up about 'inequality' and the 'gap between rich and poor'. They're not, because they're more interested in the absolute as opposed to the relative. Another win for the Corbyn camp, there.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2Uo6mIXAAIR3fH.jpg

[Raoul Duke]

That seems an extremely narrow range of questions. Something like 'Trying to raise the income of the poorest at the expense of the richest' is closer to the purported consensus?

[Jimmy Floyd]

It's an either/or question, they're not trying to nail down the nuances of what people think, but seeing which they prefer of two polarised options.

Also 'at the expense of the richest' is a fudge.

[phonics]

Can't believe people chose a 'Would you like a massive pay increase' over 'Would you like a smaller pay increase'.

I'm flabbergasted. The gap between a Yes/No vote in some poll (Scottish ref IIRC) was about 500 quid a year. THEY'RE ALL COMPLETE BOLLOCKS.

[GS]

I would understand it as a question over which metric is the appropriate one to focus on i.e. whether you care about the relative gap or the absolute level of the bottom X%. The latter is clearly the only sensible metric upon which to base policy. The former, to paraphrase Thatcher, suggests you'd accept the poor being poorer if it meant the rich were less rich.

@Raoul.

[Boydy]

If we all just keep working at making the rich richer it'll trickle down eventually.

[GS]

More people might have jobs if you encouraged business and innovation, which wouldn't be a bad starting point.

[phonics]

Encourage business and innovation :D Do they send you the PR booklet for the week? Do you realise how devoid of meaning that phrase sounds?

It's like Steve Hilton is in the building.

edit: Unless you'd like to give me a few Tory policies that ENCOURAGE INNOVATION, of course.

[Lewis]

It's still true (for the most part), and hopefully Tax Haven Brexit goes some way towards proving it.

[phonics]

How?

edit: Specifically this conservative government encouraging business and innovation?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Only as meaningless as all the tat Ed Miliband wrote on his policy obelisk.

That obelisk has a lot to answer for actually.

[Jimmy Floyd]

The remain tears on twitter are pretty spectacular tonight. The scenes when Pret a Manger starts closing outlets.

[Lewis]

How?

edit: Specifically this conservative government encouraging business and innovation?

Oh, right. I didn't mean to defend the current bunch of communists (or the last bunch of communists), who I don't suppose really did all that much for it. But 'trickle down economics' is a meme based on nothing, and innovation is clearly more likely to emerge with proper incentives.

[phonics]

Only as meaningless as all the tat Ed Miliband wrote on his policy obelisk.

That obelisk has a lot to answer for actually.

And that guy is rightfully thought of as a punchline. How is the high bar of Government fucking Ed Miliband?

[Yevrah]

I've no problem whatsoever with people earning silly money, but when they're paying their staff peanuts while creaming in it then they're taking the fucking piss and we really shouldn't be standing for it as a civilised society.

[phonics]

I've no problem whatsoever with people earning silly money, but when they're paying their staff peanuts while creaming in it then they're taking the fucking piss and we really shouldn't be standing for it as a civilised society.

Cant wait for you to hear GS' answer to this. It's an absolute cracker.