uziq
Member
+492|3448
righty-ho, chap.

not sure what an 'actual education' entails considering some of the idiocy we've seen from people with PhDs in economic history and chemistry in the last few weeks.

or how about senior cabinet ministers, like nadhim zahawi? in the last 24 hours he has flip-flopped in support of about 3 different candidates for PM. the same guy who resigned from boris's cabinet as his leadership was 'untenable', who then released a thinkpiece in the telegraph saying why it was right to reinstall johnson ... 2.5 months later! what's his 'education'? chemical engineering at UCL! wow, they really taught him some sound moral principles on that course.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

not sure what an 'actual education' entails ...  PhDs in economic history.
Not that.

Don't worry, you'll have another Oxford PPE moron installed in no time.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
this two-note tune you play is boring. learn to graduate from the recorder class, dilbert.

there are countless examples of people with 'your' preferred sort of education and work experience – STEM backgrounds, captains of industry or successful entrepreneurs, people with oodles of that 'real-world experience' you rate so highly – who then proceed to act every bit as cynical, selfish, venal and corrupt as the worst of your pantomime posh oxford toffs. it's almost as if what i've been saying, about power and money and their ability to tempt people regardless of fucking undergraduate accreditation ... is manifestly true?!

you know, a man of science would revise his hypothesis in the face of contrary results and evidence. but you're not very good at this empiricism thing, are you?

it is obviously far more salient, far better analysis, to talk about the behaviour and ideology of the conservative party in terms of class interests – if not class warfare – and in terms of their material interests. the conservatives are a loose coalition of property owners and asset managers, whose self-enrichment and continued growth/profit are their guiding desideratum. cross-comparing and divvying up the party between their undergraduate university faculties is fucking moronic in the extreme. as if a business-owning capitalist like zahawi, with his millions of squids and his chemical engineering degree, is somehow living his life by radically different principles than an oxford PPE graduate who became a banker. laughing my fucking ass off, dilbert.

Last edited by uziq (2022-10-24 02:48:07)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX
But Britain has had a very long line of moronic partying Oxford humanities toffs with the very occasional exception.


Liz Truss is holding a series of parties at Chequers, the prime minister’s countryside residence, this weekend to bid farewell to ministers and staff who supported her fleeting premiership.

Ms Truss survived just 45 days in No 10, consigning herself to the history books as Britain’s shortest-serving prime minister.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p … 08761.html
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
am i meant to be mad or incensed about her using chequers? i couldn't care less. she just spaffed £62bn up the wall on government gilts – before she got the chance to push through her plans, that is, to spaff £100bn up the wall on ensuring private energy companies' record profits for the next 18 months. what the hell is a rented marquee and a few buckets of champagne at chequers?

But Britain has had a very long line of moronic partying Oxford humanities toffs
i mean, you're talking about the oldest parliamentary democracy in the world. i doubt you are intimately familiar with the biographies and actions of most of britain's PMs. you're trading in generalisations and stereotypes: piss poor analysis, in other words, as is your wont. there have been plenty of good PMs with oxbridge credentials, the occasional good PM with zero credentials, the occasional rotten PM with a STEM background ...

the professional sciences weren't even divided up and specialised until the early-mid 20th century. the 'modern research institution' is a product of the post-'white hot heat of technology' years, à la harold wilson in the 1960s. for the vast majority of british (western) history, the sciences were part of those notorious 'humaniores' you rant about so much, i.e. part of the classical trivium and quadrivium. no shit you won't find as many 'bad' PMs with sciences backgrounds ... such a thing was scarcely fucking possible before 1900!

as before, it is far more salient analysis to talk about the history of landed, property-owning tory/whig nobs and them acting in their class interests, than it is to talk about university degrees. knowledge and university educations weren't even specialized and folded into professional work roles, prior to the 1960s.

Last edited by uziq (2022-10-24 03:00:59)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX
That money will largely go to shareholders - which are often pension funds, and be returned directly in tac, a whole lot more productive than the billions Johnson shoved to his tory chums during the pandemic via flaky PPE contracts, test and trace etc so they could trouser and offshore it.

“Unimaginable” cost of Test & Trace failed to deliver central promise of averting another lockdown
In May last year NHS Test and Trace (NHST&T) was set up with a budget of £22 billion. Since then it has been allocated £15 billion more: totalling £37 billion over two years.
https://committees.parliament.uk/commit … -lockdown/

30% of the NHS budget, GBP550 for every person in the UK spaffed away to who knows where.

The next PM is the guy who wrote all those cheques and decreed that the fraud which was clearly identified wasn't worth pursuing, because 5Bn is hardly worth bothering with.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
erm, most of the energy companies are registered in the seychelles or cayman islands. that is, the ones that aren't obviously owned by multinational or european state-owned conglomerates in the first place.

the idea that paying executives and shareholders will lead 'directly to tax contributions' is a laughable nonsense. jesus christ man, have we not just had 40 years of this nonsense?

and how is that a preferable method of gaining returns-on-investment for the exchequer than ... you know, acquiring a stake in said businesses for our fucking massive expenditure? lmao. 'it'll come back in tax eventually, err, that is, from the few small-time retail shareholders who don't know how to hide it from the taxman. ermm, maybe'.

not denying at any point that test & trace wasn't an absolute scandal and a debacle. if you want to add that to the list of public enquiries and censure, then please do. again: should i care about a booze-up at chequers, in this context? i do not.

Last edited by uziq (2022-10-24 03:31:59)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy … 022-05-03/

Probably a lot higher now.

Look if you want to live in a socialist country you could, yet you chose an fossil fuel intensive industrial nation.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2022-10-24 03:34:54)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
yes BP volunteered to do so after toxic amounts of PR and fallout. BP being just about the only entity to do so.

quite a moment when CEOs of companies are voluntarily giving up money, against the explicit policy of the government of the day.

so that's £1bn volunteered from BP when we're budgeting £60-100bn on propping up the profits of the entire sector, with no shares in return and certainly no windfall taxes on the table. great deal for the british taxpayer. you are really good at this investment stuff.

but i agree: let's live in a totally deregulated trickle-down economy where we can rely upon occasional acts of charity and kindness from the very richest. there is surely no other way to run things. like, you know, almost every other country in western europe. france and germany are hardly 'socialist'.

what you are arguing for is the same thing as saying that massive transfers of wealth to the richest in society is a good thing for all. we tried that with thatcher and reagonomics; we even tried it again, in a form, with the post-2008 bailouts and quantitative easing; and it didn't deliver shit-all for the average population of the countries whose wealth was being squandered thus. in fact, their living standards cratered. something like 1 in 7 brits this winter are facing the prospect of 'having to skip meals'. and you're talking about how, ackshually, in a roundabout way, it's good to give £60bn to shareholders in oil companies because they'll 'spread it around and maybe pay their capital gains taxes someday'. ... shut the fuck up.

Last edited by uziq (2022-10-24 04:12:28)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX
I've already said they should be threatened with the big stick of nationalisation - no idea what rabbit-hole you're going down now, meanwhile shareholders, which are often the pension funds you were blubbing about only moments ago, are often the beneficiaries.

Personally I would hand the whole thing over to a socialist-democratist-technocrat ie myself.
I literally couldn't do a worse job, and I don't like parties so I wouldn't have any.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
again you’re still in the kiddie pool of politics. ‘if only people would ask … MEEEE!’.

there there, precious pearl.
uziq
Member
+492|3448
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ff1fwMnX0AEm05A?format=png&name=large

price of gas is falling in europe.

wonder if those generous energy companies will desist from charging people +300% this winter?

but it’s okay because the CEO of BP promised to donate up to 1bn of their record quarterly profits.
uziq
Member
+492|3448
It was nothing to do with the political reaction in the UK. Yes, the policy caused uproar here because, in the current state of the country, giving a tax break to the highest earners, while inflicting cuts and austerity to pay for it, is cruel and stupid. But markets don’t care about that. The policy caused a run on the pound because it was uncosted. Kwarteng refused the offer of an assessment of the tax cut by the Office for Budget Responsibility, because he knew what it would say: that it would have no positive effect on growth. Bear in mind that the OBR was set up specifically to do this job: to provide independent assessments of the public finances. The uncosted new policy became, to markets, a signal that the new government is not serious and doesn’t know what it’s doing. Truss can wear as many pussy-bow blouses and sit on as many tanks as she wants, but while her policies continue to be uncosted, it’s Larp Thatcher, not the real thing. Markets don’t want a G7 economy to be led by people playing ‘let’s pretend’.

The fiasco has one aspect which is funny and two which are frightening. The funny side is the spectacle of people whose ideology is based on worship of the free market having their political prospects destroyed by that very same market. The howls of protest and conspiracy theories on their side make it even funnier. Daniel Hannan, the Brexiter former Euro MP who is so reliably wrong that the New Statesman ran a column called ‘What is Daniel Hannan demonstrably wrong about this week?’, wrote that ‘what we have seen since Friday is partly a market adjustment to the increased probability that Sir Keir Starmer will win.’ Amazing: the sterling crash was the fault of Future Labour. Crispin Odey, a hedge-fund manager who helped finance the Brexit campaign (he also happens to be Kwarteng’s former employer), blamed the multi-trillion-pound international market reaction on ‘Remainers who just decided that they hate this government’. It obviously wasn’t that: it was just the market passing judgment, as markets do. James Carville, Bill Clinton’s campaign manager, famously said that if he was reincarnated, ‘I want to come back as the bond market. You can intimidate everybody.’ He was talking about exactly what we’ve just seen.

That’s the, admittedly brief, funny side. Of the scary consequences, the first came during the market meltdown. Under normal circumstances, the fall of sterling would have limited immediate consequences for most citizens. (Big stress on ‘immediate’.) Bad news if you’re going on holiday, and likely to lead to higher interest rates in the undistant future, but not a systemic crisis. What was different this time was that thanks to innovations in the UK pension system, pension funds were exposed to derivatives risks linked to UK bond prices. That sounds dry: the reality was anything but, and British pension funds came within hours of going broke. It was a crisis in the same league as the near-death experiences of October 2008, and the only thing that prevented full-scale disaster was the Bank of England saying it would spend as much as £65 billion buying UK bonds. That thing when you nearly step into the street without thinking, and somebody pulls you back, and a lorry zooms past, and you feel suddenly frightened in retrospect because you nearly got run over? The UK has just been through that.

The second scary thing will play out over a longer term. Before Kwasidämmerung, the UK’s monetary policy was based on the gradual unwinding of quantitative easing. During QE, the government printed electronic money and used it to buy back its own bonds – that is, its own debt. That made the price of bonds go up, which in turn made the yield on bonds – the interest rate, in effect – go down. This policy had upsides and downsides. One principal criticism of QE has always been that it would be difficult to undo. The bank’s plan was – officially, still is – to divest itself of £80 billion of QE-bought bonds a year. But now the bank is overwhelmingly likely to raise interest rates. A crash in the currency is a sign that people don’t want to invest in your country. Unfortunately, the government needs to borrow money to pay its bills. To get doubters to lend you money, you have to pay them more – and when you raise interest rates that’s effectively what you’re doing. It’s the opposite of buying your own debt; the opposite of QE, which makes interest rates go down. This means that the UK is stamping with full force on both the accelerator and the brake. In the words of the International Monetary Fund, ‘we do not recommend large and untargeted fiscal packages at this juncture, as it is important that fiscal policy does not work at cross purposes to monetary policy.’ The IMF, which routinely bullies and hectors emerging economies, never, ever, talks like that to rich countries. In plain English, what it’s saying is ‘Don’t be so fucking stupid.’
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v44/n20 … short-cuts
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

‘if only people would ask … MEEEE!’.
But thats what Britain has now, his entire last six months, publicly at least, has amounted to
"Hi, I'm Rishi Sunak, its my right to be PM, vote for me.
me          me
    me

me       me
  me        me
me    me"

uziq can bloviate all he likes, the tories have perpetrated a coup removing a democratically elected PM for implementing her stated agenda and replacing her with an anointed one whose only publicly stated agenda is to move money from poor areas to rich areas.

https://www.ready4rishi.com/ten_point_p … at_britain

https://www.rishisunak.com/myplan

Literally not a concrete policy anywhere, yet convincing enough for the entire rabble to vote for him.
The question really is what has he promised the tories and the ERG? It must be something for them to all back him and tell Mordaunt to fuck off.

Apparently Sunak and Mordaunt both promised the ERG they would tear up the NI protocol.
This would mean no prospect of a trade deal with the US or EU - far more damaging in the long term than a mild blip in sterling.
So that leaves a trade deal with India - free migration for Indians to the UK will be the price.

Well done chaps, Sunak is so much better than Truss.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
i've never spoken anywhere in support of sunak, so i'm not sure what you're bloviating at yourself.

i've said several times that we need a general election. nobody supported truss's programme, even within her own party, and the economic self-wounding – your fanciful 'blip' – was severe and will have ramifications for months, if not years, ahead. a disaster.

the tory party isn't fit to govern. i don't know why you're trying to position me as the defender of city bankers or eton-oxford toffs. i'm not.

Last edited by uziq (2022-10-25 02:02:04)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX
So we're agreed, I am Britain's best hope.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
Apparently Sunak and Mordaunt both promised the ERG they would tear up the NI protocol.
This would mean no prospect of a trade deal with the US or EU - far more damaging in the long term than a mild blip in sterling.
So that leaves a trade deal with India - free migration for Indians to the UK will be the price.
the irony of this. you were the one cheering on the 'waking english tiger' for wisening up to the EU racket and voting brexit ... and your reasons for applause were all to do with nonsensical policies on 'getting rid of migrants' and 'multiculturalism has failed'. anyone with half a brain could see that leaving the EU would only remove white, christian migrants from a similar culture and leave a vacuum to be filled by migrant labour from elsewhere. you really are a plonker.

your hatred of jews and indians blinds you to even the most perfunctory of analyses.

you're hopeless.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX

Dilbert_X wrote:

But I'm not a brexiter you stupid hipster, so your paragraphs of ranting fall flat.
Also it would be English lion, not tiger, my god you're ignorant.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
except you have applauded every aspect of the far-right and farage's platform to do with 'multiculturalism' having failed.

the irony of you getting exactly what you asked for and not liking it is delicious. kicking out europeans and living in rampant denial that immigration will have to be sourced from somewhere else. even truss's govt went some way to acknowledging this, knowing it is electoral poison. the UK is in bad need of migrants and has been experiencing a labour shortage ever since the worst days of covid. and that is in large part due to brexit. specifically, exactly the sort of brexit you wanted, ending the free movement of labour above every other consideration or prudence.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX
Which didn't make me pro-Brexit

I've explained it repeatedly, on balance Brexit was stupid, but the EU was also stupid and I could see why people voted for Brexit.
The EU should have done more to act in the interests of europe and allow member countries to act in their own interests - not according to some socialist ideal which just pissed people off and led to things like brexit, italy electing fascists (again) etc.

That really is the last time.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
lmao, yes, hungary, poland and italy have all elected right-wing governments in repudiation of the 'socialist ideal' of europe.

because the EU has been so very socialist since 2008. mario draghi, the well-known socialist.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX
But 'socialist' policies of the EU, forcing countries to accept migrants from outside the EU, have fucked people off.

You can bloviate all you like, Britain now has an arch brexiteer beholden to a rabid rabble of tory MPs, the city and his tax-dodging wife as PM.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2022-10-25 02:39:00)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
ah yes, the ‘socialist’ european court of human rights.

it’s funny how angry you get about non-white people.

his wife normalised her tax affairs, by the way. a little adherence to the facts would go a long way.

Last edited by uziq (2022-10-25 02:43:19)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6102|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

ah yes, the ‘socialist’ european court of human rights.
Which delivered Brexit and fascists to Italy - great job chaps.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3448
i think you’ll find italy has had right-wing coalitions for much of its recent history since the meltdown of the first republic in 1994.

italy has had 68 governments in 75 years. you going to blame that on the EHRC?

italy has declined from a first-rank economic power in europe. it’s decline has been poorly managed by clowns like berlusconi and the in-fighting and factionalism for which their politics is notorious. that plus decades of corruption. is that the fault of boat people?

italy and greece’s economies were both totally shaken by the eurozone crisis, in 2008. but it’s migrants wot dun it, right?

https://econlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/17__Italys_economy_struggles_to_transcend_long-run_stagnation___Financial_Times-1.jpg

the damned human rights woke brigade in brussels!!!!

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard