Printable View
The unions should be withdrawing their funding from the Labour party. Corbyn should be setting up a new party and the socialist campaign group (and any others on the left wing of the party who can't stomach this Tory shit any more) within Labour should be leaving to join it.
The Labour party doesn't work in working people's interests any more and it'll be dead and buried come the next election anyway.
Maybe he can team up with Bernie Sanders, discover the elixir of life, and rule transatlantic politics for the next half century. Either that or the left need a new figurehead who's under 75. Perhaps Gary Economics will do it, good for the channel views.
He's said he doesn't want to do it enough times he must be nailed on to do it at some point.
Gary's Economics vs Mine's a Pint Nige would be interesting at least I guess.
You joke but I don't think it's all that far away that a major (I guess that includes Reform now) party parachute in a YouTube/podcast personality and win on the back of it.
Indeed and I wasn’t joking. There seems to be a wilful refusal on the part of the traditional incumbents to acknowledge how much the internet has changed things, the effects of which are not even remotely finished yet.
The parliamentary system makes it a ballache for celebrity politicians, as Farage is finding out. It's not like the US where you can just jump in to run for any old shit and get elected to quite a lot of power. You have to bring loads and loads of people with you at various levels. Which is how it should be, really.
I liken those incumbents to the board of Blockbuster video. Similar conversations must be being had with heads in the sand all over the shop.
It does, but there’s only so long that can hold out for. First step will be some nightmare three or four party coalition that can’t agree on anything let alone get anything done (no change there then rofl), at which point we’re basically Belgium, everyone will see how shit that is (probably somehow worse than this) and we’ll be off to the races.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
I mean, UKIP tried that with Carl Benjamin and Count Dankula. Not exactly major but these are the people they'd go after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
The problem will always be that at some point, no matter what political system one uses, simply gassing (which is what celebrities do for a living) will run into the hard reality of actual political work which, for all we moan about MPs, the majority of them actually do pretty well and effectively. That means sitting on committees, reading A LOT of very dry material, being bored, having to listen to other people, these are things anathema to those in the grift economy. Look at Reform, they have 5 MPs, at least three of whom are ego-driven celebrity politicians, and it's lasted about twenty minutes before they've fallen into civil war.
US system is much less robust than ours in the sense that someone like Trump can get voted into, and then wield, a huge amount of executive power simply by gassing. As long as we have a monarch that will never happen here.
And yet we got BREXIT.
'cos that was a public vote.
*sucks air in through teeth*
Lol @ the vape bit though.
Politics is dead.
Why is Starmer out there saying there needs to be a 'deadline' on Russia negotiating a peace agreement? Why would they go along with that, and how are we making it happen exactly? Nobody seems to be asking too many questions of this deranged shit, presumably because idiots think it makes him look like a serious person.
The approach is all such a mess, held together by this dumb arse notion that allowing him to take any more of Ukraine is akin to Hitler marching through Poland, and it staggers me that so few people can see so.
I see he's also talking about increasing sanctions, so back to the point I made when Trump suggested the same, why in the actual fuck haven't we done that sooner? Until the orange one rocked up sanctions was literally all we had.
It's genuinely embarrassing.
So if I can explain the sanctions thing, it's dumb but for the wrong reasons.
The point of sanctions is to place them on powerful people, refuse them further access to economy outside of the country, so they apply pressure within their country to the leader to change the leaders apporach. The problem being is that the only reason these people are 'powerful' is because Putin has siphoned the money/assets that make them powerful, there is no pressure they can apply to Putin that will not result in their seizure of said economic/asset power followed by a swift fall off their balcony. Fine. However, because they do not want to scare off the non sanctioned people from laundering their assets through London, they refuse to seize what those sanctionees currently retain here.
A raw example is the sale of Chelsea. There is currently 2 billion quid from that sale in a bank account in London that has not been touched since. On interest alone that account has accrued 240 million quid since the takeover. There are hundreds of multi million properties owned by sanctioned individuals that are either empty or their rent is being paid into a trust because it would be illegal to transfer the money to them (tbh I bet this is being transferred anyway using a series of well paid British law firms to launder that money and get it where it needs to go but the Chelsea sale is too high profile to touch)
As with every decision made from both a Conservative or Labour angle, the people in charge are both too cowardly and too owned by the people actually in charge (the people with money) to do anything. So now the Western World is saddled with managed decline while China central plans its way to victory.
Thanks for the explanation, that is genuinely pathetic and makes this whole thing even worse. Spunking billions up the wall on military aid when our economy is flatlining and we haven't even used the money from the sale of Chelsea to contribute towards it. I swear this whole thing was packaged as "Russian assets seized". What a crock of shit. I think I might actually be angry.
Gary's Economics on QT.
Gary Economics on QT.
QT has Gary’s Economics on.
Bruce seething her tits off.
This is also making me angry. Fiona Bruce in particular.
These parties are all absolutely dead, aren't they? All they have is "wealth taxes don't work".
They won't work, but they are sort of the intellectual end-point of the current failed, zero-sum, can't-process-second-order-effects way of looking at things that characterises all of our politics, so they will have to come up with better reasons to oppose them.
Not sure this is entirely true. Sanctions are quite arbitrary and being on a sanction list doesn't necessarily mean you've actually done anything wrong other than being in some nexis of someone who is (even loosely). It then makes sense to not go and start auctioning of their homes/possessions.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
The hard thing about sanctions is we're not all on the same page internationally and Russia can still sell things like oil at discount rates to India who can sell to us. Going through third countries is difficult to stop. It does make Russia's economy poorer and their ability to trade harder which is the point.
Back to Ukraine for a moment, I've been reading some articles yesterday and this morning and it's getting pretty obvious we'll see "peace" agreements within a month or so.
The US have sent their full detailed plan for pillaging Ukraine's resources post-war and while theirs a lot of scoffing from Ukraine at the moment, they'll probably agree to it given a bit of time and amendments.
Starmer has been waffling (which although looks silly to us, but for the majority of the electorate who are largely pro-Ukraine and ignorant to details, it's a decent move) but it's Macron's comments that give more detail. He's talking about the "peace force" - whatever that is - being ready to go around 3-4 weeks. It's been made pretty clear that they won't land in Ukraine until some kind of peace agreement is signed so again that's an indicator something is fairly imminent.
Even Putin this morning has kind of changed his attitude. There's pressure mounting and he knows that (hence the big push for extra land recently). He's made a comment about installing a UN-monitored government to replace Zelenskyy. Again, he wouldn't be doing that if he was bedding in for longer-term conflict which he has the upper hand in.
Lastly, European markets are planning for a noticeable drop in oil and gas prices. I think that's a fairly big side effect of sanctions against Russia being rolled back.
Putin has also give Trump the tentative thumbs up to go after Greenland, which suggests he's probably about to get a load of extra land in this Ukraine deal.
Longer term, if these attitudes keep up, Taiwan is probably a bit fucked too.
Why did nobody mention Gary's Economics was on QT?
He was on a podcast with that grifter CEO cunt and another guy.
The other guy posted on linkedin saying how he was surprised at how crap he was and gave ten reasons. Wild take but no surprise the business chodes agreed with him.
He was pretty shit on QT, unfortunately.
He appears to struggle against any kind of push back.
That's unusual for an internet celebrity.
Man famous for wittering at camera unprepared for opponent that answers back.
Mick Lynch barracking that absolute tit senseless on QT was peak stuff, she seemed to have forgot you only get to the top of a union by arguing with cunts constantly for decades.
Mick Lynch what a hero :cool:
Gary Economics has a lot of good points but he's generally rubbish at marshaling them under pressure. He's not some great orator or debater, he's an angry maths nerd.
He really fluffed the closing bit though, which should have been his if you want change you're going to have to fight for it and it won't be easy shtick. Or the tax wealth not work slogan, which probably fits better with modern slogan based political system we live in.
I say again though, he looks like he's heading towards another breakdown.
And you know his fans will fluff him up in the aftermath.
The problem with him is that he only has about 3 points and everything comes back to those three, which is nowhere near nuanced enough to pwn a professionally drilled politician.
And Lynch is an excellent example of someone who had the depth and ability to articulate it. Such a shame he retired.
I think his bigger 'problem' is that no one really disagrees with him all that much, it's more shrugging yeah, but what can we do and then the it never works brigade turn up sirens blaring. Or should that be Blairing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yevrah
There is no room for nuance on QT, you get about 2 minutes to articulate your worldview, and he has to spend most of that time telling those of you who don't know who he is is and what he did [promote the brand], which eats most of those two minutes.
Pretty much all of the answers given to that first question were terrible, and that was him done for his area of interest.
Anyway, Aussie election next up. Can the world's best Labor [sic] government be toppled by a bald retard in hock to the mining industry?
Wasn't there an FT hit piece debunking his back story as the toppest trader ever to have traded a while back?
Aye, but I think that probably just lent more credence to the backstory. Establishment hit piece against anti-establishment figure. Who would have thought?
I think it was less cynical than that though, they just wanted the clicks that writing something about him would bring as he's the media hot property of the day.
Wasn't there a Daily Mail poll the other day where most of their online acolytes were in favour of a wealth tax?
Everyone wants a wealth tax, as long as it's on someone else's wealth.
More money* for the government to squander. What's not to love?
*Usually leads to less revenue, but we can keep dreaming.
You know there's over 650,000 millionaires in the UK? Tax them to the fucking hilt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
It's not even more money necessarily, it's the same money from different sources, but yes, it is a distant dream in a world where profit shifting, abusive IP licensing practices, tax havens and whatever the likes of the double Irish was are the norm. A world we have created. A world it is, at least theoretically, possible to change.
Marine lol Pen barred from public office for 5 years.
Let's hope it plays out better than the US LAWFARE did.
Did I miss something?
The French national front were 'embezzling' money from the EU Parliament and using to run national campaigns / their national office or something [something as Nigel from the Pub points out is pretty much the raison d'etre for the whole shebang and endemic at all levels] and so now she and some others have been 'found guilty' in the dear Fifth Republic and automatically barred from holding public office for five years, during which time La France will have to choose a successor to President Biscuit, presumably, or can he stay / stand again? Horreur!
Everyone would be up in arms if Erdogan was doing it, if you were being cynical.
All of the far right of Europe have come out in support of Marine Le Ballpoint