Thanks for sharing.
The part about the inefficiency inside the government and i assume civil service is very interesting. Although not surprising at all.
Is that a âGotchaâ moment? 
Yeah, do your own research! Or maybe just post links to articles that are biased and favourable to your own views.
That is sad, I am sorry to hear that. I am glad that despite this you are doing ok 
. Hopefully going forward this will change and you and your family will be free to decide if you want to live in the UK, instead of being told you canât.
1 Like
Sorry I am not following the convo really. I was on post 250, saw @Lynch and @Jaffod were discussing how Reform isnât that bad and I jumped to post 480, but I imagine that graph is not very useful as we are comparing time periods where education, social spending records etc were kept to a time when we have historic references to various costs of wars and their reparations only. Again, the âother spendingâ we donât have records prior to 1900s.
2 Likes
Evening,
Firstly, I hope your recovery is progressing well.
I wasnât labelling you a hypocrite, you are entitled to your opinion, I was just questioning - off the back of your Brexit summary, and your comment about Polar Politics - as to whether your views could be seen as Polar.
Polar, is amongst other things to view other peoples views as inferior, wrong and to be hostile. It makes cross party collaboration almost impossible.
I asked you a question the other day, which you never answered. Which was along the lines of that if you had a crystal ball and therefore the knowledge that voting for Farage would see the best outcome for the Country, would you vote for him?
You are of the opinion that everyone who voted Brexit was wrong and that we should accept that and that Reform are all closet Racists and Facists. Not everyone who votes Tory is a Toff, not everyone who votes Green are tree huggers, not everyone who votes Reform are racist, not everyone who votes Labour are antisemitic, etc.
The problem is and I have said this before, is that Labour have pushed away a lot potential voters by labelling them for having views considered RW by a black and white assessment, Which is do you agree with us or not.
You may not like it, but the Country at the recent local elections showed their discontent at Labourâs Government. The middle ground went to Reform and the Left went to Green, but
predominantly the Country voted Right.
Until the majority of Labour voters start listening to people instead of polarising them, then they will forever be complaining and Labour will struggle to be voted in. There has to be some point where the penny drops.
Huh, you picked up purely on the French part. Ignoring the Financial Hub point I made, ignoring the fact that all three economies have suffered since Brexit, and yet the UK was to tank.
My point was that despite all the scare mongering, the UK has kept pace with its Counterparts. It hasnât been perfect but it hasnât been the end of the world.
The article PR posted and that I was replying to, linked estimated figures from 2021 and failed to provide a comparison.
Happy to discuss the EU Zones 2nd largest economy struggling despite being in the EU.
National Debt of 116% GDP, 5.1% budget deficit, which is the 2nd highest in the EU. Its Agricultural sector decline in terms of trade surplus and real term growth, how many prime ministers has it gone through over the last two years?
But itâs boring and a waste of both of our time.
I used France and Germany as a comparison to the UK, not to be-little them but to show how the 3 largest EU economies have fared since Brexit. The moronic thing is you took it personally, and then tried to make it personal with me. You asked me for sources and yet didnât declare your own.
So back to my point. Since 2016, and later leaving the EU, the UKs economy has faired no better or worse than the two big powerhouse of the EU.
Doh, you have entered the discussion. You should have poked your head in and then tiptoed back out 
.
For me, itâs not a case of saying Brexit is good or bad, itâs still too early to say and I appreciate it will affect people differently.
The issue I have is that people are still hung up on a democratic vote that happened 10 years ago, oppose the idea or suggestion of moving forward and almost take joy in any failure that they can link to Brexit.
Time will tell, but currently the UKs performance, as a balance across different metrics is comparable to Ger/Fra.
I was âhalfâ replying to the arms forces and defense sectary resigning due to the paltry 0.08% increase. Historically the Uk still seems to be spending a similar amount on defense (apart from times of war) and is more actually needed. There has to be a way to navigate the world w/o having more things that go boom than the other guy. I guess I am torn on that thought somewhat.
In the end the question is two fold, what type of army does the Uk want and and what type does it need. The mindset seems (to me) to be confused between the two. Is it for local defense or for global projection? The former is achievable and but not the later. There is no way to compete with China and US - the Uk is just too small. Are there any special friends that we can benefit from? The US, The EU - weâre a convince for one and a distraction for the other.
1 Like
Iâm just listening to the Rest Is Politics which is discussing this:
Rory Stewartâs take is that there are three models for UK defence, a purely defensive strategy that includes a nuclear deterrent; a larger land army that can be deployed alongside other NATO forces; or a global force which can be projected overseas with aircraft carriers and so on.
I think the main problems affecting UK defence is that it has been chronically underfunded and perpetually equipped to fight itâs previous conflict. When the budget was last cut, they scrapped things like early warning aircraft and kept the aircraft carriers without sufficient fleet support to actually support them.
Defence is a rather hard sell politically. In effect, it is wasted money, because if you spend money on a tank or something, the best you can hope for is that it sits in a field and rusts. If you have to use it, it is even more costly but not as bad as needing one and not having it.
Itâs not just weapons, though. National security also covers energy security, health, infrastructure and so on. Some of that does have positives to it. For example, if you have a higher capacity for emergency healthcare, for example, you get the benefit of that when it isnât required, but your health budget will be far higher as a result.
4 Likes
Is the answer not number 1. The status of NATO seems to be uncertain and the 3 is not possible.
I agree that there are other aspects that are of benefit - other that things that go boom. I would only ask, whether there are other ways to ensure things like expandible capacity for health care, energy security and infrastructure.
The participation of the United States is. It is possible that it could fold into a Euro-centric alliance (which, in essence, it always has been). Britainâs position is interesting because, as an island, it would be very difficult to invade by land, but it is more at threat from air and sea, and particularly under sea as we have seen from attacks on intra-country infrastructure.
1 Like
I always find myself asking are any of these likely in my life time (hopefully only another 20âish years) or my childrenâs life time (hopefully another 70 odd years) - the answer seems to have a very high probability of being no. The other forms of threats, to under sea cables, IT infrastructure and so on are very much in focus but are they a defense issue or ultimately a tech issue?
The elephant in the room is Russia - it seems to be the only loose cannon. Can it invade another country? The answer seems to be not easily. Can it disrupt other countries, quite easily. Regarding the later, our best defense is likely to be cohesive and have common values that we adhere to. Europe needs/lacks a common vision.
There are plenty of loose cannons around. The question is which ones are likely to become a problem to Britain or British interests (e.g. merchant shipping routes).
2 Likes
Russia and the US are currently actively disrupting the UK. If the US continues on its current trajectory it is possible that it will become an adversary well within your lifetime.
3 Likes
This can only be done via diplomacy. There is no way any one country can secure this and ultimately âBritishâ interests are usually also in the interest of the rest of the world.
Itâs a non sensical question. There is not a single scenario where a Farage premiership is good for the UK. Their policies back that thinking up.
Itâs not an opinion. Leaving was the wrong decision. Simple fact.
Thatâs just trolish. But regarding Reform, Farage is racist and a fascist. Yusef is racist, Pochin is racist and Jenrick is a proper nasty piece of work. We can dive further into others, including councillors if you like. Maybe not all but people of that ilk seem to congregate there. I wonât comment on other the other parties here / now.
Theyâve lost people for various reasons, including Starmer being similar to a wet cardboard box, scandals, crap Comms and some dodgy policy decisions.
Regarding your last paragraph I donât think the traditional lines of labour voters, Tory voters and so on exists anymore. People are rightly screaming for change and are finding new âhomesâ. Support has become very âdo or dieâ where someone will defend a policy to the hilt despite it not being in their best interest.
1 Like
The âOther spendingâ evolution is interesting. What does this include? Do you know? Public transport maybe? Infrastructure?
1 Like
At a guess, it may be linked to infrastructure (roads, rail, sewage, water ways and so onâŚ) but I did not delve too deeply into that. I was more focusing on defense spending and how that varied over time.
1 Like
The interesting thing is that it was dramatically reduced both during WW1 and WW2. After WW1 and WW2, it was the biggest spending of all, more than 50% of the overall budget. So yeah, youâd think that it must be investment in long-term infrastructure, and also repairing all the broken stuff after WW2.
1 Like
Social security is also interesting. The troll in me says it is linked to people in the boats but in actuality it is most likely because people are becoming older/falling off the contribution roster and getting on the sponging roster (sarcasm before people jump in)âŚ
1 Like