Liberal, Briton, ‘Centrist Fun Uncle’. Co-mod of m/neoliberal and c/neoliberal.

  • 57 Posts
  • 46 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 17th, 2023

help-circle
  • The MPs wanted Cleverly anyway but they shit the bed trying to engineer an easy opponent for him in the final two. He’s now said he’s not going to join the shadow cabinet, so while Badenoch has to deal with all the struggles of being LOTO, Cleverly will be on the backbenches, giving speeches to constituency parties, improving his reputation, sounding like some sort of experienced elder statesman to contrast with Badenoch.

    A VONC to put Cleverly in charge seems very likely unless Starmer’s polling numbers really tank over the next few years.





  • How do you define ‘large percentage’? Musk owns 22% of Tesla shares whereas small business owners may own 100% of their business. Do you think Musk is more working class then the latter?

    Shares are just an asset just like cash. Some people choose to hold their savings in cash. Some people choose to hold them in bonds, some in shares, some in property, and so on.

    When I was younger and poorer than I am today, I owned a larger value of shares than I do now because I was still saving up for a deposit on my house. Then I took out my mortgage, bought the house and the value of my ISA dropped to almost nothing as I sold most of the shares to fund my deposit. Do you think I was a capitalist when I was poorer and didn’t own a house, but working class now that I have a mortgage but fewer shares?

    The form in which you hold your assets is irrelevant. It’s how much assets you have that counts.


  • Yes, in many ways it’s so much dumber. If I’m taking home a salary from Company A, my livelihood is dependent on Company A, and then as part of my pay package I get given $1000 of shares in Company A, then I would cash them in as soon as l could and buy a diversified portfolio of shares in Companies B, C, D, E, etc instead.

    Keeping all your eggs in one basket is a bad idea. But keeping all your eggs in a basket whose performance is directly correlated with your risk of getting made redundant seems an exceptionally bad idea!

    Also, you realise that everyone who has a pension is an indirect owner of shares in hundreds of different companies? Part of the problem of Starmer using this sort of idiotic language is that it willfully plays on and exacerbates voters’ lack of awareness of the world they live in and where their pension savings are going…


  • Non-paywall link: https://archive.ph/fx3ug

    Such a damningly poor and out-of-touch judgment from Starmer.

    3 in 10 Britons own shares directly (i.e. not counting the many more who own them via their pension funds), the vast majority of them being very much working people who bring home most of their income through their salaries. The ISA system directly incentivises people to invest up to £20k a year tax free.

    Most generally, at a time when the government claims to interested in boosting investment in the UK, it is a mad decision for the prime minister to come out against share ownership at a time when he should be encouraging Britons to invest more in shares and less in cash savings products.














  • The state’s case rested on testimony from Allah’s friend and co-defendant, Steven Golden, who was also charged in the robbery and murder. As their joint trial was beginning, Golden pleaded guilty to murder, armed robbery and criminal conspiracy and agreed to testify against Allah. Golden, who was 18 at the time of the robbery, said Allah shot Graves.

    But on Wednesday, two days before the scheduled execution, Golden signed a bombshell affidavit recanting his testimony, saying Allah “is not the person who shot Irene Graves” and “was not present” during the robbery. Golden’s declaration said he was high when police questioned him days after the robbery, and that he was pressured into writing a statement blaming Allah.

    “I substituted [Allah] for the person who was really with me,” he wrote, saying he concealed the identity of the “real shooter” out of fear that “his associates might kill me”. He did not identify this person.

    Golden said he agreed to plead guilty and testify when prosecutors assured him he would not face the death penalty or a life sentence if he cooperated – a deal that was not disclosed to the jury.

    I feel sick reading this.












  • Non-paywall link: https://archive.ph/Gt4z1

    Having watched Joe Biden retain most of the tariffs he inherited, America’s trading partners have been fond of complaining the US president is “continuity Trump” and wondering whether Kamala Harris will be continuity Biden. The first epithet was never entirely fair: Trump’s focus was on closing trade deficits and gaining negotiating leverage, Biden’s mainly about industrial policy. Now Trump is threatening a massive and damaging escalation of trade protection, Harris only has to keep Biden’s policies in place, as she probably will, and she will look positively free-trade Clintonesque (Bill not Hillary) in comparison.

    […]

    At any rate, her launch of the price control plan last week was accompanied by an explicit repudiation of Trump’s new tariffs: “These actions stand in stark contrast to Trump, who would increase costs for families by at least $3,900 with what is, in effect, a new national sales tax on imported everyday goods.”

    The consumer-focused critique is not new from this administration — Biden made similar comments about Trump’s 10 per cent across-the-board proposal — but it does illustrate the gulf in policy and messaging opening up with the Republicans.

    […]

    Let’s be clear: Harris hasn’t repudiated the trade and industrial policy elements of Bidenomics, and is unlikely to. But the Democrats are at least charting a steady course that balances their desire to protect industries they deem strategic with the need to hold down economy-wide inflation. Meanwhile, Trump is sailing off towards areas of the trade policy map marked “Here Be Dragons”. Clear blue water is emerging between the Republicans and Democrats, and the idea that second-term Trump trade policy would resemble that of a Harris administration is rapidly receding.







  • It’s YouGov. The partisan split of the polling industry in the US is an unusual feature for me as a Briton. It comes up as a note of caution in political betting communities as it’s not something we really have here - all the major UK pollsters (including YouGov, who I assume subject their US operations to the same standards as they do at home) have been signed up to the British Polling Council for decades and have to adhere to various standards of transparency around their questions and methodologies. (Unusually, YouGov are the one UK polling outfit that sometimes get claims of partisanship thrown at them, but that’s because their founder later became a senior Conservative politician rather than because of any genuine evidence of partisan bias in their numbers!)

    I was amazed by this for example:

    But this thread is a reminder that without the equivalent of the British Polling Council some American pollster have a partisan skew which means when analysing the polls and betting on them that should be taken into consideration.

    It is possible for an American pollster to ask this question

    ‘Are you planning on voting for the man God wishes was his son Donald Trump or the whore of Babylon Kamala Harris?’

    and all we’d ever see from the pollster is ‘Trump 50%, Harris 50%’ as they don’t have to publish the question or data tables