The brits are in for a rough ride

[fkoehler]

Haha, Poland and Italy exiting EU? and saying goodbye to all those nice Euros flowing their way. I doubt it.

Agreed, Italy would be in a cutting off their nose to spite their face. However, just as many people said the same for years before Brexit happend too.
Of course, we'll see how happy everyone in Europe is with their EU master dictating how much energy they can use and at what price...
Keep laughing though, I'm sure its funny as heck for all Europeans to see their unelected EU masters make overt threats to its member on who they should/not democratically elect.... Sounds like paradise.

 

[fkoehler]

At least in the US most people wouldn't even know if their taxes had been cut because even most smart people act like braindead idiots with taxes. Trump fucked with the withholding schedules to make people think they got a cut, generally a few bucks a paycheck, and they didn't notice when they did their annual taxes they had actually gotten nothing.

You sound like a cross between Bernie and Brandon.
Actual data on Trump's taxcuts are well researched by experts, not the politically biased.
Long story short, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kotlikoff/2019/07/23/did-the-rich-get-all-of-trumps-tax-cuts/

"
What share of the tax cuts went to the rich and the poor? The richest 1 percent received 9.3 percent of the total tax cuts, the top 5 percent got 26.5 percent, the top quintile received 52.2 percent and the bottom quintile got 3.3 percent.

So, the rich received the lion’s share of the tax cut. But they also pay the lion’s share of taxes. The top 1 percent pay 30.2 percent, the top 5 percent pay 51.1 percent, the top quintile pays 80.1 percent and the bottom quintile pays negative 9.0 percent.
"

 

[MrSquished]

You sound like a cross between Bernie and Brandon.
Actual data on Trump's taxcuts are well researched by experts, not the politically biased.
Long story short, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kotlikoff/2019/07/23/did-the-rich-get-all-of-trumps-tax-cuts/

"
What share of the tax cuts went to the rich and the poor? The richest 1 percent received 9.3 percent of the total tax cuts, the top 5 percent got 26.5 percent, the top quintile received 52.2 percent and the bottom quintile got 3.3 percent.

So, the rich received the lion’s share of the tax cut. But they also pay the lion’s share of taxes. The top 1 percent pay 30.2 percent, the top 5 percent pay 51.1 percent, the top quintile pays 80.1 percent and the bottom quintile pays negative 9.0 percent.
"

Yeah you should really learn about this thing called context. The three wealthiest people in America own more wealth than the bottom 50%.

That puts a little bit of this thing called perspective on your data.

In other words the system is highly inequitable.

 

[mikeymikec]

I find it hilarious that the Lefties on my side of the pond so easily mesh with the Lefties on the other side.

Please, tell us more about lefties like Greenman and pcgeek11.

 

[IronWing]

You sound like a cross between Bernie and Brandon.
Actual data on Trump's taxcuts are well researched by experts, not the politically biased.
Long story short, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kotlikoff/2019/07/23/did-the-rich-get-all-of-trumps-tax-cuts/

"
What share of the tax cuts went to the rich and the poor? The richest 1 percent received 9.3 percent of the total tax cuts, the top 5 percent got 26.5 percent, the top quintile received 52.2 percent and the bottom quintile got 3.3 percent.

So, the rich received the lion’s share of the tax cut. But they also pay the lion’s share of taxes. The top 1 percent pay 30.2 percent, the top 5 percent pay 51.1 percent, the top quintile pays 80.1 percent and the bottom quintile pays negative 9.0 percent.
"

Which side of the pond might you be on? You sure write like yet one more stupid American fascist hack.

 

[zinfamous]

You sound like a cross between Bernie and Brandon.
Actual data on Trump's taxcuts are well researched by experts, not the politically biased.
Long story short, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kotlikoff/2019/07/23/did-the-rich-get-all-of-trumps-tax-cuts/

"
What share of the tax cuts went to the rich and the poor? The richest 1 percent received 9.3 percent of the total tax cuts, the top 5 percent got 26.5 percent, the top quintile received 52.2 percent and the bottom quintile got 3.3 percent.

So, the rich received the lion’s share of the tax cut. But they also pay the lion’s share of taxes. The top 1 percent pay 30.2 percent, the top 5 percent pay 51.1 percent, the top quintile pays 80.1 percent and the bottom quintile pays negative 9.0 percent.
"

jesus fucking christ.

 

[pmv]

And, people like you were saying this right up until Brexit.

Its not just yahoos looking ahead:

A Meloni election win could shift Europe's balance of power

The European Union's powerhouses will have to tread carefully around Giorgia Meloni if the nationalist candidate's coalition wins Italy's election on Sunday, or risk pushing Rome towards Hungary and Poland, European officials said.

www.reuters.com

Italy on brink of EU split as far-right could win in Brexit-like vote

Giorgia Meloni's right-wing coalition could upset Italy's relations with the EU if they win the general elections, a former Italian Prime Minister has warned.

www.express.co.uk

Hungary and Poland are in the running.
Realistically, even if none of them actually go for a full exit, wouldn't be surprised to see them start working together as a bloc to Brussels squirm.

The Express is not a reliable source of analysis about anything. It makes the Daily Mail look centrist and accurate. It's a paper run by a pornographer aimed at confirming the prejudices of conservative pensioners.

I doubt other countries will exit the EU - they seem to have hit on the formula of staying in while just ignoring all the bits they don't like.

The EU only really enforces the rules insofar as they benefit rich people, particularly German owners of capital, because the EU is a fundamentally right-wing entity that only really cares about the interests of the elites.

Being in it or out of it makes only a modest difference to anything. The UK was a deeply unequal society (a poor country with a few very rich people) when it was in it and is still that way post-Brexit (though perhaps with an overall loss of wealth).

One reason the pro-remain side lost was because most of the supposed 'benefits' of being in the EU were simply non-existent for many. E.g. they constantly told us about the great 'employment protections' workers got from the EU, but that didn't stop one of my family members being fired on the spot for daring to ask for more hours, because like many UK workers he didn't have the kind of employment contract that actually gets you those supposed 'EU employment rights'.

The UK had the worst of all worlds in the EU - a deregulated, liberalised labour market, but combined with having to face labour-market competition from the pool of 'surplus labour' created by the heavily protected and regulated labour market of the rest of the EU.

There's no great benefit in countries banding together while not addressing their existing serious flaws, and then "baking in" those flaws into the very structure under which they come together (see also the United States, particularly the compromises made to keep the South on-side). The EU, like the UK itself and the US, needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the bottom-up.

PS I voted remain, though without much enthusiasm. Just decided I disliked the pro-Brexit side (IDS or Farage) very slightly more than I did the pro-EU side (Clegg or Cameron).

 

[WelshBloke]

Which side of the pond might you be on? You sure write like yet one more stupid American fascist hack.

Unfortunately we have them as well. They are just as unpleasant over here.

 

[biostud]

I heard a commentator compare Brexit with the prohibition laws of the 1920's. First it seemed like a good idea, but within 10-15 years they would have to drop it because of the chaos it created. The UK wouldn't need to join EU again, but at some point, they will at least need to get an agreement like Norway or Switzerland.

 

[pmv]

Quite an irony in one of the Truss gang accusing others of 'staging a coup'. Not to mention then going on to dishonestly claim Truss was "elected". She was appointed by the 0.2% of the UK electorate that make up the Tory Party membership.

Truss’s cabinet in open warfare over key policies and coup accusations

Ministerial discipline breaks down as home secretary accuses fellow Tories of trying to overthrow government

www.theguardian.com

Adding to the sense of open warfare in the party, Suella Braverman, the home secretary, accused Tory MPs of having “staged a coup and undermined the PM in an unprofessional way” to force the reversal of the abolition of the 45p rate.

“We are one party, the prime minister has been elected. She has got a serious mandate to deliver. She did talk about tax cuts all through the summer in a pretty exhausting process. She is doing what it said on the tin,” she told the Telegraph’s Chopper’s Politics podcast.

This government is entirely illegitimate (and also, have lost their tiny minds). We need a general election, now.

 

[WelshBloke]

Quite an irony in one of the Truss gang accusing others of 'staging a coup'. Not to mention then going on to dishonestly claim Truss was "elected". She was appointed by the 0.2% of the UK electorate that make up the Tory Party membership.

Truss’s cabinet in open warfare over key policies and coup accusations

Ministerial discipline breaks down as home secretary accuses fellow Tories of trying to overthrow government

www.theguardian.com

This government is entirely illegitimate (and also, have lost their tiny minds). We need a general election, now.

Worth a bet on her becoming the serving the shortest term of any UK PM!

 

[pmv]

Worth a bet on her becoming the serving the shortest term of any UK PM!

Needs to be gone by the New Year, if she's to beat George Canning (who did have the excuse of dying of pneumonia - which, oddly, is the same thing that happened with the shortest-serving US President)

Edit - having just looked him up, it seems he also got shot after fighting a duel with a fellow cabinet minister over some internal poltiical dispute. They should bring that concept back.

 

[dullard]

I heard a commentator compare Brexit with the prohibition laws of the 1920's. First it seemed like a good idea, but within 10-15 years they would have to drop it because of the chaos it created. The UK wouldn't need to join EU again, but at some point, they will at least need to get an agreement like Norway or Switzerland.

I compare Brexit with giving a 3-year old child the choice between (A) water and (B) colorful, bubbly, arsenic laced soda. It is completely moronic to ever give someone that choice without being certain that they can fully understand all of the consequences. Too many children would only look at the feel-good colorful bubbles (even though they has no long-term benefit whatsoever). No person of authority should ever give a child that choice.

Same with the failed trickle-down economics. Give money to the wealthy, cross your fingers, and hope they choose to create jobs with that money. If creating jobs was a good economic idea, the wealthy would do so without any need for tax cuts. Instead, they could give tax breaks to companies that increase payroll. Or give money to the poor, who will spend it, that will go to businesses with sudden more demand, and that might create jobs. Either way you are far more likely to create a job that crossing your fingers. Trickle-down has failed the US and other countries for decades. No person of authority should ever propose such a bad idea.

Total and complete lack of leadership is all I see (not to mention the whole Boris debacle).

 

[WelshBloke]

Needs to be gone by the New Year...

I wouldn't bet against that!

 

[Fenixgoon]

Quite an irony in one of the Truss gang accusing others of 'staging a coup'. Not to mention then going on to dishonestly claim Truss was "elected". She was appointed by the 0.2% of the UK electorate that make up the Tory Party membership.

Truss’s cabinet in open warfare over key policies and coup accusations

Ministerial discipline breaks down as home secretary accuses fellow Tories of trying to overthrow government

www.theguardian.com

This government is entirely illegitimate (and also, have lost their tiny minds). We need a general election, now.

I figured I'd Google before asking how the UK PM was selected. I thought it was by the members of the party or coalition that lead the government, but that's not the case.

Literally "members of the party" select the PM based on candidates put forth by the MPs.

Fascinating. And I don't mean that in a derogatory manner. God knows the systems we use in the US (looking at you electoral college) have their own quirks (to be kind) as well.

But under normal circumstances the PM would be selected in national popular vote?

 

[pmv]

I figured I'd Google before asking how the UK PM was selected. I thought it was by the members of the party or coalition that lead the government, but that's not the case.

Literally "members of the party" select the PM based on candidates put forth by the MPs.

Fascinating. And I don't mean that in a derogatory manner. God knows the systems we use in the US (looking at you electoral college) have their own quirks (to be kind) as well.

But under normal circumstances the PM would be selected in national popular vote?

Under normal circumstances the party leader would be selected by whatever means the party has decided to use (vote of MPs, vote of membership, some combo of the two) and _then_ the public would vote for MPs - on the basis of the manifesto of their party - and the party with the majority of MPs would form the government, with their leader as PM, with the idea that it would follow the policies outlined in its manifesto.

Normally that would either happen when the party was not in government, or the new leader would call a new general election very soon after the change-over. Either way the public get a chance to vote for the MPs of their choosing in the full knowledge of who that MP's party-leader is, and what the manifesto of the party is.

What they've done here is change leader _after_ the election, and then, without an intervening general election, taken a radically-different political direction, ignoring everything they said in the manifesto under which the party's MPs were originally elected.

It's not going well. At least democracy seems to be putting up a fight, as so many Tory MPs have panicked at the prospect of losing their seats in the next election that Truss has had to start backtracking on her toytown Thatcherism.

 

[pmv]

In gaming terms, Truss is doing a "speed run" of the Thatcher era. (She's making maximum use of 'exploits' to bypass the boring time-consuming bits, like 'elections').

She's already reached the "got her MPs panicking about losing their seats" level that took Maggie 11 years to reach.

 

[misuspita]

She's in "hold my beer" mode.. Anytime you think she can go nowhere stupider... she manages to. GG

 

[sdifox]

the problem is not how awful Tories are, it's how Labour cannot rally to take down Tories...

 

[Timorous]

the problem is not how awful Tories are, it's how Labour cannot rally to take down Tories...

Labour at at 50% in several polls.

A lot of time between now and an election but if an election was held in the next few weeks and the polling holds steady that would see Labour win 450-500 seats. The worst polls have Tories getting 0 seats and other less drastic have them down to 17. The SNP could in theory become the official opposition although it is possible with that many MPs Labour will split into a centre left and a left wing party so you will have middle Labour in power with Left Labour as the opposition.

 

[pmv]

the problem is not how awful Tories are, it's how Labour cannot rally to take down Tories...

I'm on the fence about that. I wasn't hugely keen on Starmer.

Corbyn was hugely flawed, but at least he _stood_ for something and could generate some enthusiasm (cf how Labour membership shot up under him, including people joining to _oppose_ him - as far as I'm aware those increased membership figures have not fallen back much, Labour is still much more a mass party than are the Conservatives).

Starmer shows little sign of believing in anything. His only strategy seems to be to say nothing and take no stand on anything and hope the Tories destroy themselves.

However, to be fair, that passive strategy is working out way better than I expected. I entirely underestimated the Conservative capacity for self-harm.

Reading up on George Canning has given me an idea - what we have to do is bring back the old tradition of settling disputes via duels, and half of the Parliamentary Tory party will shoot the other half.

 

[pmv]

Truss's poll ratings go from bad to worse to unprecedentedly-terrible...

Liz Truss approval ratings reach new lows after Tory conference

PM’s -47 net rating in Opinium poll worse than Boris Johnson’s at height of Partygate scandal

www.theguardian.com

More than half those polled think she should resign immediately. Why is she still here? How do we get rid of this idiot/puppet?

I mean, the Tories would improve their rating if they bought Johnson back, that's how bad it is.

 

[pmv]

...On the plus side, she's managed something that had started to seem impossible - uniting leave and remain voters...in detesting her.

She's now decided to upset those radical Marxist organisations, the National Trust and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Plus that infamous communist agitator, William Hague.

 

[misuspita]

I like how they keep bringing new stuff that wasn't in the leaflets. Freeports, lower enviromental standards (including solar panel removal), selling of the NHS, nevermind stuffing the HoL with KGB agents abd party donors, some convicted in the USA. MInd blowing what UK has become.

 

[pmv]

The Tory Party are such a group of weirdos. We are getting all these Tory big-wigs adopting the most random and eccentric policies as they try to dance to the Party membership's tune.

Case in point, Suella Braverman, first declaring that she "dreams" of deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda (some commentator already pointed out how very different Tory dreams seem to be from those of Martin Luther King), and now looking to criminalize (or rather, further criminalize) cannabis, by reclassifying it in the same highest criminal category as heroin. Meaning someone could get a life sentence for supplying it.

I mean, I have no dog in this fight at all - recreational drugs of any kind (including tobacco and booze) have never been my thing at all (I always feel that I feel peculiar and unwell enough already, without complicating matters by taking any kind of mind-altering substances). But it just seems so utterly _random_ to suddenly decide on a policy like this at a time when parts of the US are legalizing the stuff (and when sometimes it seems to me that I'm the only person I know who never partakes of it).

It's clear that all these weird policy choices are purely about playing to the bunch of freaks and near-senile old duffers who form the membership of the Conservative Party. The effect is to look as if the Tories are actively trying to repel voters, and lose as much support in the electorate as they possibly can.