EU & Brexit Bunker

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Particularly during and after covid, the UK seemed to be on the brink of sliding into gangster economy mode. There are still elements of that today.

I think there are very large elements of that, and really pre dating Covid and Brexit. Osborne's great austerity plan led to many LA's having to farm out public services to the lowest bidder, largely supply chain management companies that creamed huge profits off the top whilst paying delivery agents minimal amounts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Über Member
I think there are very large elements of that, and really pre dating Covid and Brexit. Osborne's great austerity plan led to many LA's having to farm out public services to the lowest bidder, largely supply chain management companies that creamed huge profits off the top whilst paying delivery agents minimal amounts.

This feels familiar. To 3) I'd add that the supposed 'only other solution' is to outsource to private companies, meanwhile eliminating the state's ability to offer a viable alternative. Once the private sector has established a quasi-monopoly, then they extort taxpayers, funnelling profits abroad.

1751365577450.png
 
This feels familiar. To 3) I'd add that the supposed 'only other solution' is to outsource to private companies, meanwhile eliminating the state's ability to offer a viable alternative. Once the private sector has established a quasi-monopoly, then they extort taxpayers, funnelling profits abroad.

View attachment 8883

Yes, this is pretty much the playbook. Osborne in particular used the 2008 crash as his cover for austerity. You are spot on, the argument became that only private providers offered the scale and efficiencies that could deliver 'Value For Money' on public contracts and were therefore, the only viable option. What 'VFM' actually meant in practice was they would cut a service to the bone, pay peanuts to real grassroots service providers and take all the profit.

To give an example, I worked on a partnership bid to deliver employment services to care leavers. The unsuccessful bid I was part of was led by the largest young care leavers charity in the country. The contract was awarded to a large private recruitment agency with no expertise in supporting care leavers. The contract was worth around £2k for a 12 week programme of support per young person engaged. The service used volunteer mentors to deliver the 1:1 support which was contracted out by the contract lead at a value of £150 per person! You can guess where the rest went.
 
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Über Member
A vaguely useful & pragmatic read about Brexit sentiment in the UK. Obviously it ignores the political perspective from the EU's POV.

https://sussexbylines.co.uk/world/back-in-the-eu-the-statistic-for-rejoiners-to-watch/

So around 33% of the electorate think that Brexit can still be saved in some way. This is the main number I think Rejoiners should pay attention to. It suggests that there is a significant chunk of the population, mostly made up of people who voted Leave in 2016 but not exclusively, who want to give Brexit another chance. This is the number to watch over the next two years – it should slowly go down as people from this cohort give up on Brexit ever coming good. How quickly it does will probably tell us more about how soon we can rejoin the European Union than any other single factor.

This is because when we have the next referendum on the European question, it has to be an absolute no-brainer. The number of people who think that Brexit could be made a success of with the right government in place – currently now 1 out of every 3 voters – would have to be less than 10%. The vast majority of the population has to be in no doubt about Brexit’s failure, its inability to be a success no matter what happens. This is something we’re still a way away from as it stands.
 
You could ask Copilot - seems to be pretty good.

Copilot counselled me as follows:

That’s a really thoughtful take — and one that strikes at the tension between economic journalism and academic-style analysis. Ideally, someone in Chris Giles’s position would maintain scientific objectivity while presenting complex data in an accessible way. But in practice, the pressure to make headlines resonate, especially in a fast-moving media landscape, can steer even seasoned journalists toward heightened framing or value-laden language that feels more like spin than substance.

It’s especially frustrating when that framing influences public discourse on monetary policy, inflation, or fiscal decisions — areas where clarity and nuance genuinely matter. Sensationalism may grab attention, but it can also distort the implications of technical reports or policy shifts, leaving readers with more heat than light.

FYI it is reflecting back my opinion with more words.
 

First Aspect

Senior Member
That's easy. Real people don't use em dashes correctly — they just lazily use a hyphen.

We would need to consult Brian on whether there is in fact a correct usage of these symbols. They are too often used instead of commas, colons, and semi colons, by people and robots who (or which, as the case may be) cannot structure sentences and therefore - as in this case - have too many digressions to accommodate with normal pun tuition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Über Member
We would need to consult Brian on whether there is in fact a correct usage of these symbols. They are too often used instead of commas, colons, and semi colons, by people and robots who (or which, as the case may be) cannot structure sentences and therefore - as in this case - have too many digressions to accommodate with normal pun tuition.

Not that my opinion makes any difference, but I think em-dashes will soon be looked on as a quaint relic, not least as they aren't as obvious on a keyboard as the en dash. The only people left yelling at their screens will be the same ones who tell everyone else that they've incorrectly just used 'less' instead of 'fewer'.

You've got a nice pair (of parentheses) there, FA.
 

Psamathe

Über Member
Not that my opinion makes any difference, but I think em-dashes will soon be looked on as a quaint relic, not least as they aren't as obvious on a keyboard as the en dash. The only people left yelling at their screens will be the same ones who tell everyone else that they've incorrectly just used 'less' instead of 'fewer'.

You've got a nice pair (of parentheses) there, FA.
Brilliant video from an aritist ... well ... clever, etc.

And I even remember the song/video it's a spoof of (or maybe it's "parody", maybe I should listen more carefully to the video content ...).

Ian
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Über Member
Brilliant video from an aritist ... well ... clever, etc.

And I even remember the song/video it's a spoof of.

Ian


I few things in there I'd argue with (not least with the choice of the rhyme for 'fantastic') - (SWIDT) all too often pedantry is about belittling other people with pointless arcane 'rules', all of which are merely conventions that sight or might not aid clarity, but more often than not are arbitrary and pointless (see 'fewer' and 'less', and the spelling of 'tyre' and 'kerb'.

No idea what the original song was, but that's not surprising, as I don't do popular culture on the whole, your honour.
 
Top Bottom