Snap General Election called

[Son of Mathonwy]

Jesus fuck: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... riam-cates

Not a million miles away from Kinder, Küche, Kirche.

And, as I go on twitter to look at something unrelated, this is what's apparently trending in the UK:
capture.png

Puja

As mentioned in that article and elsewhere, Rees-Mogg admits that voter-ID legislation was an attempt to gerrymander the vote in favour of his party.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65599380
https://news.sky.com/story/jacob-rees-m ... s-12881602

Who would have thunk it??

Nice ammunition for Labour though, from here to the next election - Tories admit they changed the rules in order to boost their vote share.

I love how he's using it to try and excuse the local elections results. "It wasn't that everyone hated us, it's that voter ID stopped our voters." Yeah, sure, right, I absolutely believe that older, richer voters are less likely to have ID than younger poorer voters, especially considering the list included Over 60s bus pass/blue badges/expired driving licences and excluded Young Persons' Rail Card or any student cards. That's not to mention the generational divide between those who habitually carry a full purse/wallet of ID and those who just use a phone and contactless.

Clearly it was all the Voter ID fault for losing over a thousand councillors. Nothing to do with the party being a garbage fire.

Puja

Agreed. I expect that the voter ID law did boost their vote (for the reasons you give) despite what he said. And if it didn't, they'll change it.

[Which Tyler]

[morepork]

My God, what a shriveled ball sack of a man. You've gone full tea party over there and picked up the Cunty Culture War Virus from across the pond.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Economic plans from Labour!

https://labourtogether.uk/report/new-bu ... el-britain

[Puja]

Certainly saying the right things.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

Certainly saying the right things.

Puja

British economy has been broken for years; we need investment to increase productivity and not everything is to blame on austerity (although not helpful in many many areas). But governments of all hues have been ignoring the underlying problems for decades, even generations.

I wholeheartedly agree that the British economy can’t just be about london and financial services.

[Stom]

Certainly saying the right things.

Puja

Could you summarise? Hard to work through a document that dense...

[Donny osmond]

Certainly saying the right things.

Puja

I only read the intro but yes, very much the tone and direction I think govt should be following.

[Puja]

Certainly saying the right things.

Puja

Could you summarise? Hard to work through a document that dense...

Basically anti-Thatcher/Reaganism - the free market can't fix all things, concentrating money in the hands of few doesn't result in a rising tide that lifts all boats, prosperity comes from investing in people and the industries of tomorrow in a directed and deliberate way, rather than hoping the invisible hand of the market will make the right things happen automatically. Very much a shift to the supply-side economics that Janet Yellen in the US Treasury has been opining on.

Puja

[Banquo]

Certainly saying the right things.

Puja

Could you summarise? Hard to work through a document that dense...

Basically anti-Thatcher/Reaganism - the free market can't fix all things, concentrating money in the hands of few doesn't result in a rising tide that lifts all boats, prosperity comes from investing in people and the industries of tomorrow in a directed and deliberate way, rather than hoping the invisible hand of the market will make the right things happen automatically. Very much a shift to the supply-side economics that Janet Yellen in the US Treasury has been opining on.

Puja

Quite, its a political document. But I can't discern what I'd call a plan tbh- but why would you publish that at least a year away from an election.

[Stom]

Could you summarise? Hard to work through a document that dense...

Basically anti-Thatcher/Reaganism - the free market can't fix all things, concentrating money in the hands of few doesn't result in a rising tide that lifts all boats, prosperity comes from investing in people and the industries of tomorrow in a directed and deliberate way, rather than hoping the invisible hand of the market will make the right things happen automatically. Very much a shift to the supply-side economics that Janet Yellen in the US Treasury has been opining on.

Puja

Quite, its a political document. But I can't discern what I'd call a plan tbh- but why would you publish that at least a year away from an election.

Yeah, that's what I was getting too. I heard plan, saw waffle that sounded nice, and wondered where I missed the plan.

[Puja]

Could you summarise? Hard to work through a document that dense...

Basically anti-Thatcher/Reaganism - the free market can't fix all things, concentrating money in the hands of few doesn't result in a rising tide that lifts all boats, prosperity comes from investing in people and the industries of tomorrow in a directed and deliberate way, rather than hoping the invisible hand of the market will make the right things happen automatically. Very much a shift to the supply-side economics that Janet Yellen in the US Treasury has been opining on.

Puja

Quite, its a political document. But I can't discern what I'd call a plan tbh- but why would you publish that at least a year away from an election.

Frankly, I'm just pleased at them openly committing to some ideals and values to believe in. You wouldn't've thought that'd be hard for a Labour opposition - believing in things and having principles is generally what they're good at - but Starmer's been remarkably good at avoiding anything that might be misconstrued as a belief so far. It's nice to be given some idea of what a Starmer government might want to accomplish, besides "win power".

The only concern that I have with "Yellenism" as a policy, is that it runs the risk of subsidy-wars, where everyone bungs money at an industry to try and lure them in, leading to them going where they were probably going in the first place, just a lot richer. Still, the problem is that if one country/bloc starts doing it, you can't be the only ones that aren't.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

Labour possibly feel more secure now that the Tories won’t steal their clothes.

[Banquo]

Basically anti-Thatcher/Reaganism - the free market can't fix all things, concentrating money in the hands of few doesn't result in a rising tide that lifts all boats, prosperity comes from investing in people and the industries of tomorrow in a directed and deliberate way, rather than hoping the invisible hand of the market will make the right things happen automatically. Very much a shift to the supply-side economics that Janet Yellen in the US Treasury has been opining on.

Puja

Quite, its a political document. But I can't discern what I'd call a plan tbh- but why would you publish that at least a year away from an election.

Frankly, I'm just pleased at them openly committing to some ideals and values to believe in. You wouldn't've thought that'd be hard for a Labour opposition - believing in things and having principles is generally what they're good at - but Starmer's been remarkably good at avoiding anything that might be misconstrued as a belief so far. It's nice to be given some idea of what a Starmer government might want to accomplish, besides "win power".

The only concern that I have with "Yellenism" as a policy, is that it runs the risk of subsidy-wars, where everyone bungs money at an industry to try and lure them in, leading to them going where they were probably going in the first place, just a lot richer. Still, the problem is that if one country/bloc starts doing it, you can't be the only ones that aren't.

Puja

They've given us the why. Not really the what, and definitely not the how.

[Puja]

Labour possibly feel more secure now that the Tories won’t steal their clothes.

I mean, this kind of thing is antithetical to the Conservative party, especially the current iteration, so they're probably fairly safe from idea-theft on "maybe the market won't solve all problems on its own?"

Puja

[Banquo]

Labour possibly feel more secure now that the Tories won’t steal their clothes.

I mean, this kind of thing is antithetical to the Conservative party, especially the current iteration, so they're probably fairly safe from idea-theft on "maybe the market won't solve all problems on its own?"

Puja

Given the huge scale of tory intervention over the last 3 years, they've created their own market

[Puja]

Labour possibly feel more secure now that the Tories won’t steal their clothes.

I mean, this kind of thing is antithetical to the Conservative party, especially the current iteration, so they're probably fairly safe from idea-theft on "maybe the market won't solve all problems on its own?"

Puja

Given the huge scale of tory intervention over the last 3 years, they've created their own market

True - the market interventions by the Tories has mostly been "maybe the market won't solve mine and my friends' problems that we want more money on its own?"

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

Labour possibly feel more secure now that the Tories won’t steal their clothes.

I mean, this kind of thing is antithetical to the Conservative party, especially the current iteration, so they're probably fairly safe from idea-theft on "maybe the market won't solve all problems on its own?"

Puja

The Tories are unlikely to jump on the 'fuck Thatcher' bandwagon.

I for one am enjoying* the prospect of a government to the left of New Labour; there's been precious little evidence of it till now.

* Starmer has lowered my expectations that much.

[Sandydragon]

Labour possibly feel more secure now that the Tories won’t steal their clothes.

I mean, this kind of thing is antithetical to the Conservative party, especially the current iteration, so they're probably fairly safe from idea-theft on "maybe the market won't solve all problems on its own?"

Puja

With the pandemic creating a unique situation and Boris shamelessly stealing any idea that might keep him in power, I have understood why Labour wanted to keep ideas to themselves. Sunak by instinct is not going to steal Labours clothes and many in the Tory party still think Truss has the right idea, but just went too fast.

[Banquo]

Starmer seems to have ada(o)pted Kinnock's strategy- votes, votes, lovely votes.

[Which Tyler]

Rishi Sunak may join Cameron, May and Johnson as PM’s brought down by Boris Johnson. Truss only missed that list because she brought herself down before Johnson had a chance to.

[Puja]

"Relevant material" -> "Stuff that will incriminate Rish! without impeding Boris's chances of return"

If I were ReadyForRishi, and I knew there was something in there that would stitch me up, I'd release the whole lot and make sure to accidentally leak the worst anti-Boris stuff to a friendly newspaper. If you're going down, may as well take Boris with you.

A Boris revival would be the worst possible scenario for me. Quite apart from him generall being a dangerous person to have at the wheel, he's the only change that wouldn't force a new election, because he could head off public outrage on the basis that he was the original leader and "hE's GoT a MaNdAte." Plus I could see him being able to turn the polls around with his jovial, charismatic, unserious waffling persona.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

Government by WhatsApp is coming home to roost. Anyone who has been involved at the top level of government will know that ministers are a total nightmare for putting discussions onto WhatsApp rather than use Teams Messenger for example. It makes processing FOIs almost impossible as key information will be missing.

I don’t think this is just a Tory thing, but it has got worse under them.

[Sandydragon]

Ironically, if minister did what they were told and used the IT systems their departments provide at considerable public expense for official comms, they wouldn’t have to cough up private WhatsApp messages. So all those gossipy messages that are a bit inappropriate for public airing would stay private.

[Sandydragon]

So, Noris and Nadine Dorries have both resigned triggering bye elections. Johnson was about to get reamed out with the privileges committee report so has jumped before pushed. Nadine has just gone to maximise the blow to Sunak and partly in spite not getting a lords nomination.

There are days when I just don’t think you could satire British politics!