My use of the word woke chimes with other people’s use of the word.
You've completely missed the point.
binners Full Member
Also… ‘centrist cabal’?
Mate… have a word with yourself 😂
Indeed, call that hyperbole Daz? Have a word with yourself mate.
binners - show the man what proper hyperbole is. Give us a proper full-blown hyperbollox rant. I suggest that you use "Jeremy Corbyn and Lefties" as your subject matter 💡
Calling Binners: a few pages back you said this and it's been bugging me ever since...
"I don’t know if you watch Marina’s Supertankskii stuff, but she’s started referring to Truss as ‘Lynn from HR’"
Are you saying that Marina Hyde and Supertankskii are the same person? They do look similar?
Massive fan of Marina Hyde, she's a whisper of light in a shower of bilge.
I see that Fag Ash Coffey has given opposition politicians another reason to demand that the Tories should put their changing policies to the electorate:
The government had committed several times to publish a tobacco control plan “later this year”. However, the health secretary, Thérèse Coffey, does not intend to honour that promise, according to officials with knowledge of her intentions.
Coffey, who is also the deputy prime minister, smokes and has previously accepted hospitality from the tobacco industry. Since becoming an MP in 2010 she has voted in the Commons against an array of measures to restrict smoking, including the ban on smoking in enclosed public spaces, the outlawing of smoking in cars containing children and forcing cigarettes to be sold in plain packs.
I can't help wondering whether Liz Truss chuckled to herself when she decided to make Coughing Coffey "Health" Secretary.
Although Truss has never struck me as someone with a sense of humour, despite her apparent ability to take the piss.
Are you saying that Marina Hyde and Supertankskii are the same person? They do look similar?
they’re one of the same
Anyway… another day, another part of the 2019 manifesto goes out of the window.
Or is it hourly now?
From the Guardian just now, just in case any landlords were under the misguided idea that the government thought renters should have any rights…
No 10 confirms proposed legislation banning 'no fault' evictions could be shelved
The government has not ruled out scrapping long-awaited reforms to protect private renters from so-called ‘no fault’ evictions, a manifesto pledge, PA Media reports. PA says:
Downing Street said that no decisions had been made on whether to pause a promised ban on section 21 notices, which allow landlords to evict a tenant without having to give a reason.
It comes amid reports the government could move to shelve the 2019 manifesto commitment.
The prime minister’s spokesperson said today that the government would ensure that renters’ rights were protected.
The spokesperson said “no decisions have been taken on any further policies” but the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) was looking at the issue.
Asked specifically whether Liz Truss thought it was right to scrap no-fault evictions, he added: “No decisions have been made. This is something the secretary of state is considering in terms of how to improve the rental market. Clearly, ensuring a fair deal for renters will always remain a priority for this government
Ensuring renters rights by allowing landlords to boot them out for no reason, with no notice
I think dazh got the wrong end of the stick, the fiddling was being done by a cabinet who didn't bother discussing the situation or the BoEs warning.
That’s what happens when you announce a policy costing 60 billion quid that you don’t have,
Does anyone know if the £60 billion has been spent? A fairly knowledgeable mate indicated at the weekend that the BoE had made £60bn available, but up to that point "only" £5bn had been spent. I can't seem to find an answer.
Does anyone know if the £60 billion has been spent? A fairly knowledgeable mate indicated at the weekend that the BoE had made £60bn available, but up to that point “only” £5bn had been spent. I can’t seem to find an answer.
Two unrelated £60bns. Well one caused the need for the other, but no the BoE hasnt spent it (but is in the process of doing so) whereas Kwasi just doesn't want it, the Gov. has too much of our cash it seems.
just for the pleasure of it, in case it hasn't been posted already. It adds nothing to the discussion but it makes me feel a little better
https://twitter.com/simonwinkler/status/1578835949341270017
they’re one of the same
She's speaking on LBC right now...bizarre coincidence. 18:40...
A potential replacement for Truss appeared before a Lords committee today. Looking good so far.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-63221954
Long pauses before answering questions. ✅
Frequently needs a reset. ✅
Pulls strange expressions during said reset. ✅
It adds nothing to the discussion
What discussion?
On the subject of the BoE. Truss and Kwarteng are in good company with Andrew Bailey. The Uk economy is being managed by idiots.
https://twitter.com/richardjmurphy/status/1579921290693312512?s=46&t=xqSid82QHlLrBVHoMGtUvA
On the subject of the BoE. Truss and Kwarteng are in good company with Andrew Bailey. The Uk economy is being managed by idiots.
An idiot paid twice as much as his predecessor - presumably to make him do as he's told?
He used to be my boss...very much a yes man. Very uninspiring. Supported Brexit cos that was the way to get the top job.
I see that the first U-turn of the day is upon us and it’s not yet 9am
Ree Smug is presently on radio 4 explaining how the windfall tax advocated by Labour, that they’re about to levy on the energy companies - the one they said they definitely wouldn’t impose as it was anti-growth - isn’t actually a windfall tax at all
If it looks like a duck, etc…
The Haunted Pencil completely fabricating the truth on R4 right now. Now trying to disconnect the mini-budget from anything that's happened. Talking absolute shite.
I’ve never heard such utter horse-shit in my life.
None of this is anything to do with the ‘mini-budget’ at all
Of course it isn’t…
They really do think we’re all idiots, don’t they?
They really do think we’re all idiots, don’t they?
Trouble is they know enough of us are, that's why they come out with this tripe
They really do think we’re all idiots, don’t they?
I came to try and type something which was a bit more optimistic, to suggest they're just floundering along.
But do you know what, I can't say that. They've made deliberately awful decisions based on flawed and extreme ideology, plus keeping thier pals in the money.
Now they're applying all sorts of cover tactics and u-turns, while refusing to admit that they have done anything wrong or harmed anyone.
So yes, they are thinking we are stupid enough to not see through them.
🙁
The polling would suggest that it doesn’t appear to be working
As people watch their pensions shrink and their mortgages rise, I doubt they’ll buy Moggy telling that black is actually white and these things happening straight after Lizzie and Kamikwasi’s mini-budget is entirely coincidental
Apparently even the Mail is sticking the boot in to this flailing incompetence
https://twitter.com/Ian_Fraser/status/1579968380416970752
the Economist comparing Truss' govt with the shelf life of a supermarket lettuce
Nonsense. An iceberg lettuce will last considerably longer than that. Don't be fooled.
So PMQs. What are the chances of Starmer’s first question being ‘How’s it going Prime Minister?’. 😃
So PMQs. What are the chances of Starmer’s first question being ‘How’s it going Prime Minister?’. 😃
LOL! In the current situation Starmer should be given the chances to be the next PM. See if he can pull a rabbit out of the hat.
It actually is – you just don’t understand why. Calling someone stupid is not sexist, even though it is pretty thoughtless and generally unwarranted (we all do stupid things occasionally, but those who are genuinely unintelligent need support not insults). But when you tack on the word ‘woman’ you are combining the two words into something else which is indeed misogynistic. Why? Well, when was the last time you heard anyone called a ‘stupid man’? It’s not a common phrase. No, we usually see ‘stupid boy’ or ‘stupid girl’, but not ‘stupid man’.
I just did a google and according to google .. its almost like the only person to ever say Stupid Woman was Jeremy Corbin. Either way I don't think either myself or Ernie would feel like we use one over the other and frankly I'd use far more specific language for Boris or Truss?
... but lets continue ???
So is attaching a "she" pronoun misogynistic? Should we say of Teresa May (just using your example) he/she is stupid or do we need to then add it back if the person is some stage of transgender?
Ultimately you don't need to answer because ultimately what many people are sick of is keeping up with this weeks politically correct bollocks and that is what many refer to as "Wokism". Regardless of any pre-imported definition.
As Ernie said earlier it's an American import... so very much like my mate Linus who is from Benin and NEVER been anywhere near the American continent being told he is "African American".
He started off thinking it was funny ... explained to the African Americans telling him the above but really didn't get offended until they continued telling him and wouldn't let it drop.
So is attaching a “she” pronoun misogynistic? Should we say of Teresa May (just using your example) he/she is stupid or do we need to then add it back if the person is some stage of transgender?
If you're actually worrying about this
I'd stop watching GB news & go for a bike ride, plenty of actual things to be worrying about
Daz - re your earlier question as to whether the BofE should be independent. I'd say yes, but, and it's a big BUT, the implementation of a consistent economic policy means the government and BofE should be on the same page, In this case they're not - Kwasi Kwarteng is sure he's cleverer than everyone else in the world, and the BofE are cleaning up the mess as best as they can, as they clearly no longer have any regard for him.
Honestly I think it's a bit rich for Richard Murphy to chip in so... what does he think the Bof E should do? If they had continued to toe the government line exactly, as he suggests, you'd be a lot deeper in than you are now. You'd have some bankrupt pensions for a start
go for a bike ride, plenty of actual things to be worrying about
How ironic.
So "absolutely" no spending cuts......according to that daft woman Truss.
Except it doesn't need spending cuts if there is no increase in spending, inflation will take care of that.
Obviously the solution is more inflation!
what does he think the Bof E should do?
He's been very clear about what they should do. That they should use QE to control gilt yields and calm the markets. This would prevent pension funds collapsing, bring down interest rates, allow sterling to recover and mitigate the impact of the inevitable recession. As it stands both the BoE and the govt have their heads in the sand and are driving us towards depression because of their narrow minded neoliberal ideology.
https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1580083601575907328?s=20&t=usEuRESgp_k9JLrGQdH7Wg
No spending cuts could also be taken to mean no increases. So no increase on benefits, public wages, pensions, department budgets, councils etc. Effectively still reductions that will impact many.
The present estimates of Kwasi’s recently created financial black hole vary between 45 and 65 billion quid.
You cant find that down the back of the sofa
That is simply completely unattainable through anything other than huge cuts to public services, across the board, and everyone knows it. Not least Kwasi and Liz
So Lizzie is either lying through her teeth when she said no cuts, or she needs to row back on Kwasi’s entire mini-budget.
Hmmmm…. I wonder which it is?
If you devalue the pound to zero you can borrow as much as like and never need to pay a penny back. Plus your mates in hedge funds will get mega odds on that, just make those bets in dollars though, lads, eh!
You cant find that down the back of the sofa
Yes you can. In 2008 they 'found' the best part of a trillion quid to throw at the banks. In 2020 they found 400bn to pay people's wages and support businesses. The question is not whether it can be done, it's where the money comes from and how to spend it. In this case they've chosen the two worst options, which is getting the money from borrowing, and then spending it on tax cuts for the rich. Had they decided to use QE instead, and invested it in public services and infrastructure and support for people struggling with their energy bills, then we would have had an entirely different outcome for the same amount of money spent.
Every time she opens her mouth interest rates go up, and the value of the line goes down.
Every time she opens her mouth interest rates go up, and the value of the line goes down.
The core problem is that she doesn't understand what the job is. When you're campaigning you can say what the hell you like, but once in power you have to analyse and react to events in the real world and decide the appropriate course of action. Truss is still in campaigning mode, and doesn't (or refuses to) understand that the nature of her role has completely changed. I have to admit that I massively underestimated how thick she is. I knew she'd be bad but this level of incompetence is off the scale. Gone by christmas, if she's lucky.
The IFS claims that to 'balance the books' on the £62bn spaffed could involve cutting 220,000 public sector jobs. Truss says she won't cut public spending but will cut taxes for the rich. If Bailey is stopping the bail-outs on Friday then it's QE, self-inflicted recession or modern magic. I think she believes in the latter.
Modern Magic Theory (MMT)?
I think she believes in the latter.
I've been saying for some time that Truss (and Johnson before her) are secret MMTers. Rees Mogg pretty much admitted it in an unguarded off the cuff comment when he admitted that the national debt doesn't ever get paid back. If true the problem is not that they're MMTers, but that they want to use it to enrich their friends in the city rather than use it to fund public services, infrastructure and all the other things that govt does.
Oh FFS I hadn't seen the wording:
During her leadership contest, the prime minister said, and I quote her exactly: ‘I’m very clear I’m not planning public spending reductions.’ Is she going to stick to that?” Starmer asked.
Truss replied: “Absolutely".
Liz Truss has apparently learnt the art of denial from Michael Heseltine
I can foresee no circumstances under which a challenge would take place," said Michael Heseltine in 1990, when asked about his ambitions to succeed an increasingly unpopular Margaret Thatcher.
Within two months, the circumstances he was previously unable to foresee had all of a sudden presented themselves.
Like many heirs apparent, however, he never actually won the prize so long forecast to come his way.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30005426
So no plans for today then.
I thought the leader of the Opposition was some big shot lawyer with forensic skills? How the **** could he not pin her down with a question along the lines of "Can you categorically deny that there will be any spending cuts?" Instead of asking her a question about what she is "planning"?
She will be able to say that she didn't lie to parliament.
Kier is lacking somewhat in the grab em by the balls and squeeze stakes.
The lawyers I know are right ruthless gits.
Yup. Big difference between not having plans to do something and not doing it. Luckily for Starmer, the press is on his side at the moment so this semantic point will probably not be used to pin him down. If it was Corbyn though I think we know what the media would be talking about.
Kier could absolutely tear Truss a new a hole, but he just never seems to get out of 2nd gear.
IANAL but can you really pin somebody on not doing something in the future? Realistically, plans adapt and change. I don't think any Prime Minister can categorically say what is going to happen at some point in the future beyond their current plans. You can however hold them to account on what they're planning today.
The other thing with her statement though... How I interpreted it, was that she only said spending wouldn't change. There was no mention of how it might be redistributed. Does that overall spend include the energy packages, with services being cut to pay for it?
