Darn it, I love Marina Hyde
Yet as Hunt outlined the biggest U-turn in modern political history to the Commons yesterday afternoon, Truss flanked him, wearing that sad, faraway smile of a Tory wife standing next to her husband explaining why he’s resigning over a sex scandal. This arguably isn’t the optimal look for a leader.
Hopefully there will be a silver-haired revolt !!
It won't happen but if was left to Angela Rayner to deal with Liz Truss at tomorrow's PMQs I think Truss's public humiliation would be total.
I’d pay good money to watch that Ernie.
As it stands I think it’s going to be pretty compelling viewing anyway. She’s just completely vacant and appears to be total denial about what she’s caused
Christ only knows what’s going on inside her head
Nothing.
That would be amazing Ernie.
Come on sks chuck a sickie this one time.
I’ll let Richard Murphy explain. Which countries don’t have any debt BTW
The block you've quoted in no way suggests that paying off the national debt would remove all money from the economy 🤣 it says that running a deficit aids the economy, which it does.
Several countries with fiat currencies run extremely low national debt. Algeria, Iran, Nigeria all run below 2% of gdp, India Luxembourg and Sweden are in the low 20s. The UK runs 350% of gdp, or 15 times as much as Sweden. There's good reasons for that (particularly the boom in natural resources in Scandinavia), but it demonstrates that you can have very low or zero national debt and the economy will be fine. Slower, sure, but fine
Edit : some countries like Saudi also have massive funds, eclipsing their national debt. The Saudi fund is $400bn bigger than its national debt, so you could fairly claim it's in the black
in both cases (unions vs “think tanks”) – I don’t fund them, they don’t represent me, and they don’t work in my interest.
No Union works in your interest? Christ.
Algeria, Iran, Nigeria
No thanks.
there wouldn’t be a single Tory MP returned in the whole north west of England
If that happens, the beers are on me… for all of you. I’ll also get in the pork pies (and vegan alternatives) if the same happens in West Yorkshire.
Busting the triple lock will cost them a chunk of their voters when winter costs bite, wonder who they'll alienate next.
Maybe it’s a language thing, that is leading me to misunderstand what people are saying at times.
Not just you, so don’t let them wind you up. A couple of people on here have spent the last year or so making it sound like a sovereign nation/central bank can keep “producing” money, without adding the rider about needing to back it up economically.
Thanks morecashthandash, I think I need to do some swotting up.
"The poll found 55% of members think she should resign now, while 38% believe she should remain."
Why are some people still maintaining that Liz Truss's resignation is not inevitable?
She has been in the job for about 6 weeks and already the majority of her own party's members want her to resign. She doesn't even represent her own party anymore.
What makes it particularly shocking is that Liz Truss has always enjoyed considerably more support among party members than among Tory MPs, it is in fact the only reason that she won the leadership election.
So if support for Liz Truss is so low among the party faithful what must it be like among Tory MPs?
The only reason that I can fathom why some are still resisting replacing her is because they want her and her Chancellor to make unpopular decisions which her replacement won't have to make, and therefore, it is hoped, won't be too tainted by them.
Edit ; The other obvious reason is the call for a general election would grow ever stronger
Why are some people still maintaining that Liz Truss’s resignation is not inevitable?
I would presume that it is because there is no easy way to replace her.
They cannot (surely) go through the same process they did to choose her - weeks of debates and going to the party members. Twiddling their thumbs whilst the country burns. With no confidence of getting anyone more suitable.
There is no consensus amongst Tory MPs who it should be. Most seem to have far more people who loathe them than support them.
Then there are the crackpots who think it should be them, but just embarrass the party (or should) because they are so inadequate.
They are in a pickle.
So if support for Liz Truss is so low among the party faithful what must it be like among Tory MPs?
Reports doing the rounds of around 100 letters into the 1922 committee Ernie. 179 needed to compel her out under current rules (either written or un-written like the constitution).
but I can’t stop the unions lobbying for fair wages for their members either.
To flesh out @chestrockwell comment. Where do you think weekends off, sick pay, paid holiday and fair employment contracts came from? Here's a clue, those unions that you think don't represent you had a fair input into it.
I would presume that it is because there is no easy way to replace her.
They cannot (surely) go through the same process they did to choose her – weeks of debates and going to the party members. Twiddling their thumbs whilst the country burns. With no confidence of getting anyone more suitable.
There is no consensus amongst Tory MPs who it should be. Most seem to have far more people who loathe them than support them.
Then there are the crackpots who think it should be them, but just embarrass the party (or should) because they are so inadequate.
They are in a pickle.
If there is a 'sudden' cabinet reshuffle and some more moderate MPs appear in major roles I'd guess that some large powerful block of power behind the scenes is fully in control, keep Truss as a figurehead (presumably in a fridge somewhere) to avoid the embarrassment of a new leader and the 'grown ups' run the place in an effort to stabilise the bleeding and maybe more than 3 Tories keep their seats come two years time.
Major flaw in that is Truss will have to speak to the public at some point. Or the full on frothy loons spoil the cosy relationship.
Then drop kick the whole recession and UK implosion onto Labours lap when the inevitably get elected next time (whenever that is), spend four years licking wounds and getting a vaguely sensible leader in and then blame Labour for the whole economic disaster. Get another 12 years back in on that. And rinse and repeat ad infinitum.
Where do you think weekends off, sick pay, paid holiday and fair employment contracts came from? Here’s a clue, those unions that you think don’t represent you had a fair input into it.
Sure. I don't deny Unions have historically done a lot for workers rights, but (afaik) all that was in place before I was born. Saying they represent me because they did some good for the country a century ago is like saying the Tories represent me because they kicked out Hitler. I don't believe (and again, I might be wrong) unions have made any significant difference to people outwith their membership (who they do good things for) in the last 40 years.
Reports doing the rounds of around 100 letters into the 1922 committee Ernie. 179 needed to compel her out under current rules (either written or un-written like the constitution).
Thought they couldn't touch her for a year with a VONC regardless of numbers? Circa 200 MPs against her, I'm guessing the cabinet would have to threaten a revolt and then its presumably a quiet chat and she'd be handed the bottle of whiskey and the revolver rather than any proper channel?
Hopefully she necks the whole bottle and just says, **** it then, lets have a GE instead.
.
Behind the scenes look at Whitehall FC
but I can’t stop the unions lobbying for fair wages for their members either.
That was me
To flesh out @chestrockwell comment. Where do you think weekends off...
That's not me.
I've not (deliberately at least) suggested I don't think they represent me or anyone else. My assertion is that I can't accept lobbying by unions but then not accept lobbying by the ASI.
However, if the unions represented everyone's perceived interests they wouldn't have any lobbying to do. Those whose interests align with the IEA for instance might find the unions' very much counter to their own. Not suggesting 5lab is one such individual - for starters he'd have been hounded off stw within minutes - but people's opinions outside here diverge quite a lot.
The former No 10 aide Dominic Cummings, now Johnson’s nemesis, claimed the prime minister is supporting Liz Truss’s leadership campaign as he thinks “she’ll blow and he can make a comeback”.
If this is true I wonder if Johnson even dared to dream that she would screw up as badly as she has.
Sure. I don’t deny Unions have historically done a lot for workers rights, but (afaik) all that was in place before I was born. Saying they represent me because they did some good for the country a century ago is like saying the Tories represent me because they kicked out Hitler. I don’t believe (and again, I might be wrong) unions have made any significant difference to people outwith their membership (who they do good things for) in the last 40 years.
Lucky you, the government are about to reset the clock to 1901 so you can live through the whole palava again!
Our present Home Secretary and next PM was on form today. A nice line in irony with the ‘Coalition of Chaos’ jibe
https://twitter.com/yvettecoopermp/status/1582429961813577728?s=46&t=FNUyYA8NVVHrL8poT6v3eQ
My assertion is that I can’t accept lobbying by unions but then not accept lobbying by the ASI.
Why? You know who the unions lobby on behalf of. Governments changing policies, and the media repeating the messaging of, secret opaque organisations using multiple names and hiding their funding sources and connections… you can’t really think that they’re equivalent? If so, then the lobbying is working very well on you.
I don’t believe (and again, I might be wrong) unions have made any significant difference to people outwith their membership (who they do good things for) in the last 40 years.
Shall we start with schools and hospitals? Safety in transport? Maintaining standards in the workplace can help the end user, not just the workers.
If this is true I wonder if Johnson even dared to dream that she would screw up as badly as she has.
Given that he made her foreign secretary in his cabinet of dimwits and got to witness her clueless ineptitude on a daily basis, maybe he knew full well?
It’s taken her just over a month to take his title of worst ever Prime Minister and for half of that time she couldn’t actually do anything
Hey, I put a little time into this. Might as well get some further use out of it.
[img] 
[/img]
Our present Home Secretary and next PM was on form today. A nice line in irony with the ‘Coalition of Chaos’ jibe
Suella said something about the "tofu eating wokerati."
Yvette Cooper should've picked her up on that as well and asked who is this childish person throwing this nonsense about? Can they not put an actual adult in the job who's going to take it seriously.
That shit should be stamped out every time it's brought up.
As a non-union member (I’m not sure any unions cover mid-level IT managers
You're welcome.
Can I choose if some of that fee is paid to support the Labour Party? (I don’t think so but I’m happy to be told otherwise)
Yes you can.
Our present Home Secretary and next PM was on form today. A nice line in irony with the ‘Coalition of Chaos’ jibe
Very nice response.
The fact that the Home Secretary resorts to childish name calling is frankly embarrassing.
Honestly, they are pathetic. Just making up slurs and ridiculous tropes. If we had a half competent press they would all be gone.
Given that he made her foreign secretary in his cabinet of dimwits and got to witness her clueless ineptitude on a daily basis, maybe he knew full well?
I had assumed that Johnson made Truss Foreign Secretary after she revealed her impressive diplomatic skills following a trip to Beijing to open up new pork markets?
Although I guess that as a leading contender to replace him he might have thought that he would rather have her somewhere where he could keep an eye on her, and force her to submit to collective Cabinet discipline.
In much the same that Theresa May made Johnson Foreign Secretary.
you can’t really think that they’re equivalent?
This is definitely getting into the realms of "mostly academic and really best discussed over a beer and pork scratchings not a touch screen" so I'll pick something we can both firmly agree on that is a bit more relevant to us all being trussed up like a pig for the spit.
Lobbying by "secret opaque organisations using multiple names and hiding their funding sources and connections" is bad, it's bad for democracy, it's bad for policy, politics and, it turns out, much of the stuff those same organisations purport to favour.
I do agree with all of that.
Genuine question?
There's been plenty of candidates of late and indeed in the past but can anyone think of a more vile person to hold a cabinet post than Cruella Suella?
Thought they couldn’t touch her for a year with a VONC regardless of numbers?
If it's an internal conservative VONC, as opposed to say Starmer holding a commons VONC, then it's just a matter of internal conservative party rules, (and only conservatives voting on it). Internal tory rules which seem to be re-invented on the fly these days.
Won't look good to the commons or the general electorate though, burning through PM's and cabinate minister roulette like cheap candles.
There’s been plenty of candidates of late and indeed in the past but can anyone think of a more vile person to hold a cabinet post than Cruella Suella?
As someone mentioned up there - no matter how bad you think it is, what follows is likely to be worse.
Let's face it before braverman you'd have asked the same thing about Patel.
I do agree with all of that.
Well there's always the offer of beer and pork scratchings!
Let’s face it before braverman you’d have asked the same thing about Patel.
Indeed, look at sucession of tory PM's, we've gone from Cameron, to May, to Jonhson, to Truss...
Don't ever say things can't get any worse, famous last words!!!!!!
Hancock and Hunt are still at large.
Also Gove has been suspiciously quiet as of late.
"Let’s face it before braverman you’d have asked the same thing about Patel."
To be fair, even as Attourney General Braverman demonstrated that she was another level of nastiness to Pritti Vacant.
Be interesting to see how long she'll stick around, the culture war that she and her sponsors at the Telegraph embrace so clammily is a busted flush electorally. I'm not sure that her bilious rhetoric is even on message with the rest of the party right now, though she is too tone deaf (and maybe just plain evil) to realise it.
It was the beer and scratchings bit I agreed with most.
Talking of suspiciously quiet: Weird how Sunak isn’t being mentioned much in current leadership chatter (media wise), despite being the first choice for so many MPs and being a true Brexit believer. How come he isn’t the obvious stand-in choice? Does Johnson still hold so much sway? Does the next party leader need to be someone loyal dense enough to have defended Johnson to the very end?
Genuine question?
Genuine answer, no.
Braverman is an exceptionally poor ambassador for the Triratna Buddhist Community which she is an active member of.
I go my local Triratna Buddhist Centre at least once a week for yoga, and very rarely meditation, you could not meet a nicer bunch of people.
I believe that Braverman wasn't brought up Buddhist and as the Triratna Buddhist Community is of British origin, its founder was an Englishman, it presumably means that she is a convert. Which imo makes it even weirder that she should practice a form of meditation which focuses on "loving kindness"
I believe that Braverman wasn’t brought up Buddhist
I can't comment on that, but I have a casual interset in Buddhism as it seem one of the only 'religions' focused on being nice rather than being a complete arse.
There's no way she is Buddhist in any sense or understanding of Buddhism.
Talking of suspiciously quiet: Weird how Sunak isn’t being mentioned
Interesting point, he's very tory and has a teflon suit and a nice smile... we might well see Sunak as the next unelected PM..
Who the hell knows. We need a GE, but the conservatives don't have to allow it, and it would be against thier interests.
You know, as much as I've been sickened too see all these right wing think tankers pop up all over the BBC over the last few years, now is not the time to cancel them (though the BBC probably will!)
Now is the time to invite them on more than ever, to hold them accountable and expose their toxic influence and sources of funding.
I liked Eddie Dempsey's comment a couple of weeks back when he said that Liz Truss should attends the dispatch box dressed as a Formula 1 driver, sporting a baseball cap emblazoned with the Shell logo and with her dress adorned with patches from all her other hedge fund and think tank sponsors.
