advertisement


The Premiership of Mary Elizabeth Truss.Sept 2022 - Oct 2022

Always possible it was a deliberate of criminal sabotage to short the pound with his banker/hedge fund mates.

Pretty sure it was from previous events and news surrounding this non-budget. The u-turn doesn't matter the bet has already been paid out, an awful lot of damage already done.
 
Without personal comment, perhaps you could explain how you would carve up the bill and any subsequent change in the bill differently.

Your problem is that the distribution of people and incomes amongst the percentiles is not linear. You need to re-do your thought experiment but with 1 guy in the 90th percentile earning 1bn, 10 guys in the 80th earning 1 million, 1000 guys in the 70th earning 100,000, etc. etc.
 
Without personal comment, perhaps you could explain how you would carve up the bill and any subsequent change in the bill differently.

We need more information. Presumably drinker #10 owns large swaths of the pub and sits on his own in a large comfortable seat by the fireplace, while drinkers 1-4 sit on the floor near the entrance to the toilets. The others get a motley array of misshapen tables and wobbly stools that barely fit one buttock, all dating from the 19th century, but they have been made to believe that these stools are better because of tradition and heritage. Drinker #10 also instructs the landlord to stock only the beer that he prefers, arguing that he pays more than the others so should have more of a say in such matters. And although he is a vocal supporter of CAMRA, he also holds large investments in InBev, which supply the pissy lager that he knows drinkers 1-4 prefer.
 
He’s just said, live on Radio 4, that the budget plans had been signed off by Truss before they were announced. This directly contradicts what Truss said yesterday.
It sounds increasingly like an argument in IKEA between a married couple.

‘I never wanted to come here in the first place. It was all your idea’.

‘No, we discussed it before we left the house. It was definitely a joint agreement’.

‘Well, we’re leaving now, even if it means doing a U-turn in the car park’.
 
We need more information. Presumably drinker #10 owns large swaths of the pub and sits on his own in a large comfortable seat by the fireplace, while drinkers 1-4 sit on the floor near the entrance to the toilets. The others get a motley array of misshapen tables and wobbly stools that barely fit one buttock, all dating from the 19th century, but they have been made to believe that these stools are better because of tradition and heritage. Drinker #10 also instructs the landlord to stock only the beer that he prefers, arguing that he pays more than the others so should have more of a say in such matters. And although he is a vocal supporter of CAMRA, he also holds large investments in InBev, which supply the pissy lager that he knows drinkers 1-4 prefer.

Assume they all sit around the same table and chairs and drink the same beer. In the same way people have access to and consume services such as police, national defence, fire brigade, NHS, education etc etc.
 
Your problem is that the distribution of people and incomes amongst the percentiles is not linear. You need to re-do your thought experiment but with 1 guy in the 90th percentile earning 1bn, 10 guys in the 80th earning 1 million, 1000 guys in the 70th earning 100,000, etc. etc.

That would highlight the differences even further, as in reality the top guy isn’t buying 4 blokes a beer, it’ll be many, many multiples of that.
 
Assume they all sit around the same table and chairs and drink the same beer. In the same way people have access to and consume services such as police, national defence, fire brigade, NHS, education etc etc.
But they don’t, do they? The rich are as insulated as they want to be from state-provided education and healthcare, for example. To flog the dead analogy, they have access to a private bar with better seating, better drinks and waitress service, so they don’t give a toss that the public bar is falling to bits.
 
But they don’t, do they? The rich are as insulated as they want to be from state-provided education and healthcare, for example. To flog the dead analogy, they have access to a private bar with better seating, better drinks and waitress service, so they don’t give a toss that the public bar is falling to bits.

Not really. If their house is on fire, it’s the same fire brigade who respond. If Russia invade, it’s the same army / navy / RAF. Had cause to use the NHS last week. Absolutely brilliant, couldn’t fault it. If people want to use and pay for an alternative, that’s up to them, including which pub they drink in.
 
Assume they all sit around the same table and chairs and drink the same beer. In the same way people have access to and consume services such as police, national defence, fire brigade, NHS, education etc etc.

Ah here I thought the beer represented the public services, the landlord the government, and the pub the country. This parable is a mess.
 
FWIW, the pub I used to go to just served tap water colored to look like beer and used its income to kit out hooligans, many of which were sent to other pubs to rough up the clientele and landlords to convince them that they should model their pub after the hooligans' one. The others just patrolled their own pub, handing out occasional beatings to anyone who looks different. The place was a bit shit, really, so I decided to go to a pub that serves real beer. It's a shame that there are clientele here who want to turn it into a dive worse than the one I came from.
 
I listened to Kwateng on the Today program this morning, the guy is, as we say up here in Glasgowland, an effin roaster.

But he was allowed to spout that pish about no one paying more than £2500 in energy bills, no mention of the fact that it's patently untrue or the fact that energy bills are up about 60% on a year ago.
 
Not really. If their house is on fire, it’s the same fire brigade who respond. If Russia invade, it’s the same army / navy / RAF. Had cause to use the NHS last week. Absolutely brilliant, couldn’t fault it. If people want to use and pay for an alternative, that’s up to them, including which pub they drink in.

If the NHS was a pub the bar staff would be superb and it would be an absolutely fantastic pint. But you might have to queue for a year or two.
 
That would highlight the differences even further, as in reality the top guy isn’t buying 4 blokes a beer, it’ll be many, many multiples of that.

Buying a beer for many, many multiples of people who otherwise would not be able to have a beer.

But the absolute amount doesn't matter and the main point is that your analogy omits the distribution of income and of income across the population and if you include those it no longer makes the point you want it to make.
 
Time to close rotten Tory Party. Close CCHQ, ditch brand. Rebuild with new principles, new people, new institutions, new tech. Startup 2023, take over after collapse 2024. Beating Starmer the easy part, startup toughest...

Dominic Cummings (Twitter).

PS Can we close it with fire please?
 
Cummings is such a massive prick though. Probably the only person in contemporary politics with a more deluded sense of his own intellectual worth is "Lord" Frost.
 
Time to close rotten Tory Party. Close CCHQ, ditch brand. Rebuild with new principles, new people, new institutions, new tech. Startup 2023, take over after collapse 2024. Beating Starmer the easy part, startup toughest...

Dominic Cummings (Twitter).

PS Can we close it with fire please?
He missed out the really important bit, namely razing Tufton St to the ground.
 


advertisement


Back
Top