"Can Britain's military be saved? Will government..." Topic

… heed the wake-up call?

"Britain's armed forces have undergone a very long recessional. In 1945, the Army alone had some three million men under arms, with millions more in the navy, air force and various colonial forces. At the start of this year, by contrast, the "trained strength" total of the Royal Navy, RAF, Marines, and Army came to just 126,440, a figure that has actually fallen since Putin's invasion of Ukraine. But it was not just that very low figure that explains John Healey's dramatic resignation last week.

Until relatively recently, British defense secretaries were much envied by their European counterparts — because they were allowed to conserve as much real combat strength as possible by cutting everything else to conserve money for training and realistic exercises, as well as the continuous maintenance it requires. Typical in that regard was Healey's namesake Denis, a fiery socialist and decorated beachmaster at Anzio, who served as Labour's defense secretary from 1964-70. No relation to his 21st-century successor, this elder Healey worked closely with his cabinet colleagues to cut costs on buying warships, aircraft, bases and the like, to focus instead on what really matters: training, munitions and maintenance…"

link

Armand

It is truly sad!
Still they have much to be proud of.
Alas, social programs and immigration will do that!

Russian Frigate Opens Fire With Warning Shots in the English Channel

link

Armand

JMc +1

You can look at recent procurement decisions for a start i.e. AJAX over CV90.

Immigration is a red herring, not everything is to blame on that but it makes a nice scapegoat if you really don't like immigration and want to change that.

No but illegal immigration/aliens does take $ away from more important things. That monies can be used to e.g. defense, R&D, etc., etc. Illegal aliens are an added burden to any gov't's bottom line. Even if some say the cost is not that much(?). Plus the social disruptions it causes with crime, plus in all aspects including terrorism, espionage, etc. Even to the point costing the local populations deaths, rapes, etc., etc.

Uncontrolled open borders is a threat to any nations' national security …

In today's world of islamic terrorists, etc. that becomes a major problem …

Like it or not …

In the US Immigrants generate more federal tax revenue than the cost of the services they utilize.
Immigrants consume roughly 24% less in welfare benefits per capita than native born Americans.
A number of factors influence this situation:
Immigrants are often of a working age.
Immigrants are highly employed.
Many immigrants leave the US before retiring.
Even illegal immigrants pay billions in payroll and income taxes despite being barred from many benefit programs.

But facts don't often fit the narrative.
Immigrants are often an easy target for underlying issues.

Glup!…

Armand

@Martyn K

Flag on the field, we have an unlawful Equivocation Fallacy on the play! The original claim mixes legal and illegal immigrants together, which is misleading.

*Legal immigrants, especially skilled and working-age ones, are typically net contributors. They generate more in tax revenue over time than the cost of the services they use.

*Illegal immigrants do pay billions in taxes each year, including sales taxes, payroll taxes, and property taxes through rent. However, most studies show they create a net fiscal cost when factoring in education, healthcare, and services for their U.S.-born children — particularly at the state and local level. Lifetime net cost estimates range from roughly $68,000 USD to $225,000 USD per person in several analyses.

Overall, LAWFUL immigrants use about 24% less welfare per capita than native-born Americans, largely because many are working-age and legally restricted from many benefits.

But households headed by ILLEGAL immigrants often show higher welfare usage rates due to their citizen children, and place additional stress on social welfare and criminal legal systems (e.g., the California Department of Corrections has stated that illegal aliens are in prison at TWICE the rate of general population).

Bottom line:
*High-skilled legal immigration is a clear economic win.

*Low-skilled Illegal immigration, on the other hand, is a net burden both economically and socially. Good policy should strongly distinguish between the two. Facts matter more than narratives!

UK immigration is actually declining rapidly – in two years of the current government the figure has fallen to a level last seen in 1999 (ignoring the COVID years).

But hey, that's just facts – things that inconveniently ruin some people's narratives.

In the US Immigrants generate more federal tax revenue than the cost of the services they utilize.
Immigrants consume roughly 24% less in welfare benefits per capita than native born Americans.
A number of factors influence this situation:
Immigrants are often of a working age.
Immigrants are highly employed.
Many immigrants leave the US before retiring.
Even illegal immigrants pay billions in payroll and income taxes despite being barred from many benefit programs.

But facts don't often fit the narrative.
Immigrants are often an easy target for underlying issues.

Talk about spin … or propaganda …

SB +1

UK immigration is actually declining rapidly – in two years of the current government the figure has fallen to a level last seen in 1999 (ignoring the COVID years).

Yes with the current US gov't in the USA shut down the borders tight. And started a concerted effort to deport as many as they can. As illegal aliens … not immigrants like many here's kin came over in the 19th and early 20th Centuries. Immigrants came to the USA legally …

But hey, that's just facts – things that inconveniently ruin some people's narratives.

No what you and Martyn posted is inconvenient facts … But IIRC, neither of you live here in the USA.

And ill-conceived comments like those posted about illegal aliens and their actual effect on the US economy and how the US economy really works … Is not what was posted by both of you.

Again read what SB posted … may be a few times … it may sink in …

SB Legion +1

Yes, combining legal immigrants, H1— and others here via our laws and "illegal" is a false flag argument. But not new in the least.

A story from just today:

Taking a page out of the playbook of Democrat-run "sanctuary" cities in the United States, the Green-governed Lambeth Council in London has vowed to no longer assist the British government in detaining illegal migrants.

This means they will no longer provide intelligence on foreigners in the area around the British capital to the Home Office, potentially creating a security crisis.

The decision, which was made by former Green Party co-leader Jonathan Bartley, was motivated by concerns that immigration raids in London were "causing fear" and "dividing communities", the Daily Mail reported.

Explaining the decision, Bartley said, "Our diversity is one of our greatest strengths and we want all residents to feel safe, valued and able to engage with public services without fear.

"As Refugee Week begins, it is right that we take a careful and transparent look at how information is shared in relation to immigration enforcement activity.

"We need a clear picture of what is happening now, under what circumstances information is being shared, and whether current arrangements reflect the kind of borough we aspire to be."

Bartley said that it was important to the Green council leadership that all migrants feel "welcome" and in Lambeth, given the local government's commitment to "diversity, equity, and inclusion".
"

Wow, I would have bet Seattle, Portland, Austin, LA or NYC… but no, it is London under Mayor Sadiq Khan.

Per UK.Gov -

In YE December 2025, there were 46,497 detected arrivals via illegal routes, 7% more than in the previous year. Small boat arrivals accounted for 89% of detected arrivals via illegal routes.

So, not actually decreasing, but miniscule compared to the 2021-2025 flood entering the US annually.

What changed in 2025? 🤔

"Yearly data is tracked by the U.S. government's Fiscal Year (FY), which runs from October 1 to September 30:

FY 2021: 1.73 million nationwide enforcement actions.

FY 2022: 2.37 million nationwide enforcement actions.

FY 2023: 2.47 million nationwide enforcement actions.FY 2024: 2.00 million nationwide enforcement actions.

FY 2025: 530,000 to 600,000 nationwide border apprehensions, marking the lowest total in 55 years.

FY 2026: Border encounters remain at near-historic lows, with apprehensions dropping significantly below the averages of previous years."

21 through 24 are just what they will admit to. But then they told us it was all under control. 🙄

OVI +1

AGamer …

So, not actually decreasing, but miniscule compared to the 2021-2025 flood entering the US annually.

As pointed out … The border was closed tight by the new POTUS and his Admin. The flood of illegal aliens was the folly of the previous POTUS and his Admin.

FWIW – the UK is tiny compared the USA's size/land mass. It couldn't survive a 4-year period that resulted in 10-20 million illegal aliens arriving on their island.

But no need to compare the two nations … the US may be younger … but much, much bigger. There is no comparison … from those standpoints.

Something Ironic

I'm sure there were Celts who welcomed the arrival of Roman "migrants"
Roman/Celts who welcomed the Anglo/Saxon/Angles "migrants".
Anglo/Saxons who welcomed the Viking and Normans.

Now we have UKers welcoming the illegal migrants.

Not alone.

There were tribes that welcomed the English/French/Spanish/Dutch migrants
Now many in the U.S. who welcome the illegal migrates here.

History does repeat.

We were not talking about illegal migrants, the point was on immigrants.

The illegal migrants are about 10% of all arrivals. The numbers of returns is increasing because this current government is actually bothering to process claims to stay – the previous government stopped doing that which meant the backlog got huge. No surprise 🙄

Net migration is currently at a decades long low, and is about 20% of what it was in 2022, a quarter of what it was in 2023.

Reality doesn't always align with popular beliefs – in this case the popular belief that immigration is increasing is demonstrably false.

Legion –

Your original comment was " No but illegal immigration/aliens does take $ away from more important things. That monies can be used to e.g. defense, "

My comment/observation was that the UK – with 1/6 the population of the US, is encountering an illegal migration of just over 1% of what the US encounters annually.

In addition, the UK grants asylum to approximately 60% of thos 47,000 – our asylum system has a backlog of over a decade and tends to lose track of them in the interim.

Land mass and age of the nation(s) are not relevant factors in the UK's defense budget ….. nor, in ours.

What is relevant, is politics. The UK's Conservative Party feela the only solution is to cut back on the UK's Welfare State ( of which illegal migration is a small, albeit expensive part) and/or raise taxes on the general populatiomn. Labour does not feel, at this juncture, this is the preferred pathway.

My use of 2021 to 2025 should have been 2021 to 2024 to avoid confusion, but the Presidential term runs Jan 20th to Jan 20th

As far as illegal migration to the US, annually, the numbers used by the Biden administration typically excluded the 500,000+ "gotaways" (their term, not mine) and the 600,000+ who enter on valid visas and overstay.

About a year ago when there was smoke about NATO troops going to Ukraine i saw some pieces about the public attitude ro fighting for their country in a foreign land. It wasn't a scientific study by any stretch but one thing that popped out was people who I would see as "pro military service" were saying they tell their kid not to serve, it isn't worth it especially the idea of being sent away for questionable reasons, ala 1914. How prevalent is that view in traditional military friendly groups? Assuming its like the US where a good chunk serve because of family tradition or civic duty vs a job or college money.

The Biden numbers of actual illegals and "got aways" were understated purposely. So the numbers I posted were just those admitted to.

Just as their constant statements of how secure our border was, were li##.
Just as were their demands for more taxpayer money in order to secure the border.
Just as was that administrations reports of border patrolman whipping migrants from their horses.

New president and the border becomes as tight as a …………..!

Brexit has cost Britain 6% of GDP annually, so you can blame other things than illegal immigration, too

Yeah, the Brexit loss is larger than the defence budget. Voting to be poorer hasn't helped anyone.

I can't be bothered to talk nonsense about Britain.
I'm too busy talking nonsense about the USA.

We bow to your nation's abilities to talk nonsense – world class!

My comment/observation was that the UK

Yes I know I was contrasting the two nation. Since I live in the USA … not the UK …

our asylum system has a backlog of over a decade and tends to lose track of them in the interim.

Yes I know that as well. That was a big error from the beginning …

Land mass and age of the nation(s) are not relevant factors in the UK's defense budget ….. nor, in ours.

Yes and no … The bigger the land mass the more territory to manage and defend. The bigger the territory the more $ is required to again manage and defend.

The $ spent on illegal aliens no matter how much takes away the priority of any republic, nation, country, etc. I.e. the protection of its people and territory. With out that there is no security, no deterrents, etc.

The age of a nation only comes into it as point of contrast to size and budget.

My use of 2021 to 2025 should have been 2021 to 2024 to avoid confusion, but the Presidential term runs Jan 20th to Jan 20th

Yes, I know and understood that … I may have not made that clear.

As far as illegal migration to the US, annually, the numbers used by the Biden administration typically excluded the 500,000+ "gotaways" (their term, not mine) and the 600,000+ who enter on valid visas and overstay.

So either way Biden and his admin was not doing the proper and legal actions when it came to controlling the border. And lied about it as well … The term "gotaways" IIRC, was from CBP and or ICE. It was a clear description by those on the front line. Describing what was occurring.

Many in Congress and the media have a predilection of obfuscating words to make it sound less accurate … but almost more "pleasant", more appealing, less threating, etc. But the fact remains, "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it still is a pig. E.g. illegal alien becomes undocumented immigrant. Illegal is illegal no matter how you want to paint the picture to fit a skewed narrative …

There was no concept, no plan, etc. for opening the US borders with little to no vetting. And allowed somewhere between 10-20 million illegal aliens[IIRC that is the legal term, no matter what some say] to come in flooding the system in a 4 year or any period of time for that matter.

Bottom line as I and others have pointed out. Many US citizens are dead because directly or indirectly illegal aliens came across an open border. And some broke US Law way beyond just crossing illegally. Which was sanctioned, allowed, permitted, mandated, invited by Biden, his Admin, many in Congress, the media etc.

That is a crime and those who allowed it have blood on their hands … buckets of it. And they all are going to get away with. At the high cost of US lives …

That is not only not right but evil …

OVI +1

Striker +1

We were not talking about illegal migrants, the point was on immigrants.

Yes there is a difference … but no … again no illegal aliens should be allowed in.

The illegal migrants are about 10% of all arrivals.

That seems a bit low … but I'm not there. However, the numbers of illegal aliens[not legal immigrants] in the US is higher. Because just anyone crossing the border without the proper authorization is illegal. And just because that is sanctioned by the current leadership at that time. If the laws are not properly changed to reflect a massive influx/invasion of illegal aliens i.e. criminals. The US Laws, etc. are being broken by the very gov't that should be enforcing those laws.

If the laws are not what some people want, then it should be changed the usual legal procedures. If it passes all the hurdles of that system. But by just opening the borders overtly, etc. is illegal as well …

Brexit has cost Britain 6% of GDP annually, so you can blame other things than illegal immigration, too

Yes there were many things here in the US where $ is spent incorrectly, illegally, etc. Not just the massive expenditures on illegal aliens. But the masses of illegal aliens add to the burden economically as well as law enforcement matters. More criminals cost more $ spent on LEOs, enforcing the laws. Set in action, agreed upon by the US Congress.

Yeah, the Brexit loss is larger than the defence budget. Voting to be poorer hasn't helped anyone.

Yes that is like a self-inflicted wound. But things like that do happen in many countries. And by the time they see it … it is too late.

I can't be bothered to talk nonsense about Britain.
I'm too busy talking nonsense about the USA.

Oh come now John … I've seen you talking nonsense about many topics … But it is part of your "charm" … Talking nonsense is not rare with many of the denizens of TMP …

But generally, you mean well …

Legion +1

Any cost for an illegal, is an unnecessary expenditure.
Any crime by an illegal, is an unnecessary crime.
Any DEATH by an illegal was a preventable DEATH!

We bow to your nation's abilities to talk nonsense – world class!

Well people who live on glass islands shouldn't throw stones … yes ?

And frankly most here and elsewhere in the USA really don't give a
💩 how the UK and many others in Europe up their own nations. Just so their nonsense, etc. does get not in the way of how the US Congress, media etc. things up on this side of the pond.

About 250 years ago the US broke most ties with the Crown, the UK …

And how did the US get repaid for its trouble ? In 1814 the Redcoats came back and burned the WH down …

I'm shocked ! Shocked I tell you !!!

Saw this, this morning in the Irish Times

"SURGE IN ASYLUM CLAIMS LAST WEEK BRING HIGHEST NUMBER SINCE 2024
JUNE 20, 2026
NIAMH UÍ BHRIAIN
IRISH NEWS

350 people claimed asylum in Ireland last week, official figures show – the highest number of weekly arrivals since September 2024. Almost two-thirds were single males, and more than a third came from Somalia.

The figures, published in the IPAS Weekly Arrivals and Accommodation Statistics report from the Department of Justice, show this is the third successive week where arrivals outstripped the numbers on the same period last year.

The report records that 223 single males claimed asylum, along with 32 single females, 44 people who were in couples, three lone parent guardians and 48 children in the week ending 14 June.

119 persons arrived from Somalia, while another 103 arrived from Pakistan and Nigeria and 44 from Afghanistan. Despite Georgia being designated a safe country, 21 persons from that county claimed asylum here last week.

The Minister for Justice, Jim O'Callaghan, has said that almost 88% of persons claiming asylum in this country are arriving by crossing the border from Northern Ireland.

The number of persons reported as being accommodated by IPAS has hovered around the 33,000 mark since December 2024, despite some 18,000 migrants seeking asylum arriving since then.

Gript has discovered that the Department of Justice has involved itself in the acquisition of what was private residential housing which it has allocated to applicants for International Protection.

"I discovered this when researching the allocation of a house in the Forgehill estate in Stamullen. My subsequent inquiries to the Department elicited the information that "35 residential properties are owned by the State for the in-community accommodation of people seeking international protection where group accommodation is not suitable. These properties provide accommodation to very vulnerable residents including some with disabilities and specific needs"," Matt Treacy wrote.

Taoiseach Micheál Martin has admitted that up to 80% of IPAS applicants in Ireland are actually economic migrants who are not genuine asylum seekers."

A dribble compared to what we were getting during Biden. But for a country with the population of Ireland, a lot. Even the government admits they were only there for economics.

Based on countries of origin, Majoritively Muslim. I doubt assimilation will be easy, or happens at all.

At least Ireland got rid of birthright citizenship. If only the U.S. would. 😞

OVI +1

I think I got DH for saying this was going to happen after the last elections there and big wins from the opposition. I said a lot had to do with dissatisfaction with immigration policies. Well guess what they are saying:

"Keir Starmer will resign as Prime Minister of The United Kingdom."

"He failed badly on two very important subjects- IMMIGRATION AND ENERGY"

Immigration went down under Labour. That onshore wind turbines were stopped was not under the administration of Starmer. What "they" are saying is nonsense.

🎈 📌

"Public disapproval of Labour's immigration policy was a foundational driver of Keir Starmer's political collapse, as it directly fueled the electoral rise of Nigel Farage's Reform UK.

The connection between migration and Starmer's forced resignation centers on three core pressures:

The Local Election Backlash: Broad public dissatisfaction with how the administration handled border control and immigration targets led to devastating losses for Labour in city councils. Voters defected heavily to Reform UK, signaling that Starmer's strategy was failing to satisfy the electorate.

The Makerfield Trigger: The final catalyst for Starmer's exit was the Makerfield by-election. The seat was heavily targeted by Reform UK's anti-immigration platform. While Labour's Andy Burnham won the seat, it was because of his personal working-class populist brand—proving to Labour MPs that Burnham could defeat Reform UK on the migration issue while Starmer could not.

Geopolitical Vetting: U.S. President Donald Trump publicly weaponized the issue just prior to the resignation speech, posting on Truth Social that Starmer "failed badly" on immigration, adding international weight to the domestic perception that Starmer had lost control of the narrative"

AND

"Keir Starmer held a strict, unwavering view against issuing any new oil and gas exploration licenses in the North Sea. He maintained this position to support the UK's net-zero climate goals and argued that domestic drilling would not lower home energy bills because oil and gas are priced on volatile international markets. [1, 2, 3]

This rigid energy stance became a primary battleground that directly accelerated his political downfall due to three severe pressures: [1]

* The Iran War and Energy Crisis: Following the outbreak of the war in Iran and the closure of the critical Strait of Hormuz shipping lane, global oil and wholesale gas prices skyrocketed. Despite skyrocketing domestic energy bills and immense economic pain, Starmer refused to budge on his drilling ban. [1, 2, 3]

* Intense Cabinet and Labour Party Backlash: As energy costs spiked, Starmer faced a severe internal mutiny. Heavyweight figures like former Prime Minister Tony Blair urged him to abandon his green commitments. High-profile internal rivals like Wes Streeting publicly distanced themselves from Starmer by advocating for North Sea drilling to raise tax revenue, while major Labour-backing trade unions (like Unite and GMB) heavily opposed the ban to protect energy sector jobs. [1, 2, 3, 4]

* U.S. and International Friction: Starmer's position caused a major diplomatic rift with the United States. U.S. President Donald Trump publicly slammed the drilling ban, labeling Starmer's energy policies a failure and aggressively demanding that the UK "open North Sea oil" to help calm reeling global markets. [, 2, 3]

Starmer's stubborn commitment to his climate objectives at the height of a global energy crisis alienated his own MPs, the British public, and key international allies, leaving him politically isolated before his resignation"

Not my opinion. Just facts.

3 "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt"

Starmer was quite successful with his political agenda, but he was not able to convince "the public" with his work.

Bottom line:

Successful politicians are NOT forced to resign.

Baring mental decline (that was ignored with Joe), incapacitating illness (I can name multiple presidents that stayed in office with those, at least their wives did), crimes that just cannot be ignored, (🤔 no, because Hitler, Stalin and others stayed in).

His mistakes and party losses cost him the support and confidence of his party.

I showed 2 big mistakes. Facts, NOT my opinion. I've seen the protests in England and Northern Ireland. I talk to people there. Not happy and migrants are a big concern with them. Same here., but they are "illegals".

Fuel

"As of June 22, 2026, the average cost per US gallon in England is approximately $7.77 USD USD for petrol (regular gasoline) and $8.69 USD USD for diesel."

Gas 3.68 in my town and US citizens bit#ch about that!
Diesel: around 5.88

Both are dropping.

"U.S. President Donald Trump publicly weaponized the issue just prior to the resignation speech, posting on Truth Social that Starmer "failed badly" on immigration"
and
" U.S. President Donald Trump publicly slammed the drilling ban, labeling Starmer's energy policies a failure".

Think you'll find most people in the UK don't give a what Trump thinks or says.

The gap in petrol/gas prices between the US and the UK is significant but not quite as large as you believe. You need to remember that a UK gallon is 4.546 litres and a US gallon is 3.785 litres.

Also sensitivity to petrol/gas prices is not as high in the UK as the US as people in the UK have on average smaller cars with higher fuel efficiency, distance of travel is generally shorter and villages, towns and cities are more pedestrian focused.

Noggin argue the facts, not with TDA emotions. Those I presented were not Donald's, but from multiple sources accessed via AI on the web.

I didn't even put out what my acquaintances in the UK said.

Views in the UK vary by location. What one hears in London is not the same in other areas. Just as what is said in NYC, Seattle, Portland and Austin is different then rural U.S., suburban U.S. Brentwood or Indianapolis.

Your social circles are probably different than Joes living a middle class or lower existence in Manchester.

Same with the media you trust and listen to.

People have a tendency to listen to what corresponds to what they WANT to believe. Same with friends and work mates.

Believe what you want, but he is gone and you can bet it was forced.

Will his party and their backers learn. Not a chance in Hell.

Martyn,

I specifically asked for translation equivalents to us measures. Even playing field.

I understand the differences though, I have driven Ireland. Yes, people there are more tolerant of the cost, as you become accustomed to higher costs.

But does not distract for that being a part of the unhappiness, especially because of the pushing green agenda and hardline toward it that he took.

A green agenda that I will say, many are beginning to believe was sold to them as a false flag. How much of Al Gore's Earth in the Balance, is now hokum?

Go on then I am going to bite.

Which part of climate science do you disagree with:

- The average surface temperature of the earth has increased?
- Human activity has increased the level of CO2 in the atmosphere?
- CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere?
- Increased temperatures drive rising sea levels and extreme weather events such as heatwaves, droughts, forest fires and storms?

From the web. The internet never forgets.

Post
A past twitter of Keir's

" app
user avatar
Keir Starmer

@Keir_Starmer

The party is over @BorisJohnson.

Resign."

Martyn

I don't have the time right now, but short answer:

Climate change is a constant of the history of earth. We are and were going through another period of change, but the hubris of some always wants to blame man for all things. They need a catastrophe. Also a heck of a money maker for many.

In my youth they were predicting another ice age.

Just Al gore since I mentioned him:

Sea Level Rise Timeline: Gore claimed that melting ice sheets in Greenland or West Antarctica would cause sea levels to rise by up to 20 feet "in the near future." A UK High Court reviewing the film ruled this "distinctly alarmist," noting such a rise would actually occur over millennia.

Mount Kilimanjaro's Snows: He claimed the snows of Kilimanjaro would entirely disappear within a decade. While the mountain's glaciers are shrinking, this decline is primarily driven by localized deforestation rather than global temperature.

Climate Refugee Surges: Gore predicted global climate refugees could surge to as many as 1 billion within the century. This highly speculative figure has not materialized on that timeline, and the number remains significantly lower.

The 500 ppm \(CO_{2}\) Timeline: In 2006, Gore extrapolated that carbon dioxide emissions would rise to 500 parts per million (ppm) within 50 years. Modern tracking by NOAA shows levels sitting around 427 ppm. He recently acknowledged the planet has not hit the 500 ppm threshold, citing a much faster-than-expected deployment of renewable energy."

But if one wants to believe in it, by all means do! But don't force the costs and changes on me, to support their beliefs.

I don't want a toilet that won't flush or must be flushed 5 times to save water.
I don't want to be forced to use an electric car, that is not practical for my area and I don't want to pay higher fuel costs so someone driving an electric vehicle can virtue signal.

Bottom line, I am not convinced and I become less so as each decade passes.

I won't break their rice bowl. Don't then try and break mine.

But this only had to do with reasons for his resignation. Not a discussion on green agenda: "right or wrong" 🙂

Starmer's problem was being too methodical – with the huge majority that he won he needed to be bold.

Well if it's any consolation, his replacement (the self proclaimed socialist), won't change the playbook a whole lot. Those unhappy will just have to stay unhappy for a bit.

As I said earlier:

"Will his party and their backers learn. Not a chance in Hell."

It will continue, business as usual.

"Your social circles are probably different than Joes living a middle class or lower existence in Manchester."

I lived in Rusholme for 6 years – so I'd say I've got a pretty good idea what the Manchester locals think and how they live.

The thing that some don't want to understand about science is that it is based on reproduceable measurements and testable theories.

Saying "I don't believe in it", doesn't make it any less real. (unlike fairies)

OVI +1

My PC was not FMC for a few days. Now that I'm 5 by 5 again you are all still 'n and moaning, etc. about the same 💩…

Guess there is something to be said about consistency …