The logic of this argument demands that the UK is led by someone whose wealth/social struggle background is their most important characteristic, not their competence/intelligence. That is not good.
That means being led by the likes of Angela Rayner – is that the superior alternative? The politics of envy that will now be washing over from Labour is going to be tough to watch.
Not least because it is so hypocritical: support ethnic minorities…but only until they either display a tendency to think for themselves (how dare they!) and choose the “wrong” party or – God forbid – integrate and do really well for themselves. Then the knives really come out.
The complaints being levelled at Rishi in this article – if they do become a widespread phenomenon – point to a society that no longer understands or desires aspiration. Its aim is enforced mediocrity and whinging.
Aspiration is fine. The salary is fine. But the woeful lack of understanding of how the majority live is not good enough. “Let them eat cake” springs to mind. And his wife’s questionable tax status….
His wife’s tax status was legal. It was more a case of the optics – and the question whether things which are legal are also morally OK.I thought Sunak rose to the challenge of that question well: saying that Akshata is his wife, not his possession and she makes her own decisions. He showed himself to be a modern man.
I understand the difficulty in identifying with Sunak, with his sharp suits, Peloton bikes and stupidly expensive coffee cups…but there again – why did all the Red Wall voters love Boris so? Sunak knows far more about living in modest circumstances than Boris ever will.
I am not sure of the relevance of his wife’s tax status. She is Indian and owns shares in her parents Indian company, that makes her very rich. Won’t stop the mud slinging though.
Knowing how to build a substantial fortune seems to me to be a better qualification for running a country than knowing how to collect benefits.
The glory of a democracy is that he will also have to have the intelligence to find out what bothers voters who don’t share his background if he wants to stay in post.
surely not? I want lower middles with ” reound veowel seounds” corfam shoes, a desperation to hang on to their jobs at any cost who will lie and cheat so to do?
Spot on! the truth is that furlough has made the country lazy – particularly the medical profession and others in the public sector who want the money without working for it
Its more than just lazy. Lockdown madness has had a revolutionary impact on cultural values. The State promised whatever it takes..a magic money tree. A hooman right and entitlement to prosperity was made manifest. The primacy of individual and family responsibility was torched. The collapse in working values in DVLA and GP surgeries was a malign offshoot of this re balancing of our relationship to a Big Brother State.
Why do you suggest Rishi has a “woefully lack of understanding of how the majority live”? He was not born to great wealth. His father was a GP and his mother a pharmacist in a small pharmacy. His brother works as a psychologist and his sister a civil servant. While this is far from a background of life on the dole very few politicians do not come from very similar backgrounds. To suggest he is some Marie Antoinette figure who has no concept of ordinary life is both absurd and dishonest.
The fact that he made money and married well does not negate a pretty average middle class background.
This is the usual left-wing stuff which conflates the income of the Prime Minister with that of those on minimum incomes. Rishi Sunak’s competence and integrity are traits which should be celebrated not banging on about his wife’s income. It is like criticising people for the colour of their skin or their upbringing over which they had no control..
Rishi Sunak has shown that he attaches importance to directing government aid principally to those most in need. It’s the policies that count, regardless of life experiences.
What manifest rubbish! Perhaps you might like to have a look at the great politicians who made this country during the 19th Century, and whose wealth, altruism, nobility and belief in and, sense of duty, made their wealth ensure that they did not need the job.
Surely even those possessing the classic shoe sized IQ can manage to work out that those who need the job by virtue of otherwise impecuniosity and quasi unemployability, coupled with a deluded middle class sense of faux grandeur and peer group adoration, are, like Boris Johnson, merely faux dictators?
Just look at the Shapps , the Private Pike creature and the fireplace salesmen? In the days of Gladstone, Peel and Liverpool they would have been lucky to have been employed as footman!
At last – someone who recognises the true nature of the dogma which possesses the Progressive Left; the cult of Equality. It manifests itself also an an anti discriminatory mania – call it MAD – and also drives the obsession with Diversity. This mania explains everything about our moral, spirtual and socio-economic collapse and all of the Biden and Starmer programmes. Meritocracy has been crushed. Take education. The best students are banished from Oxbridge. Grammar schools opposed and private schools set to be attacked. It explains the toxic hysteria which greeted the attempt to reduce taxes for the wealth creators. All tax policy exists only to redistribute to the ‘poor’. Profit and enterprise and growth are now all seen as harmful discriminatory concepts, hence the callous indifference of the Blob and Public Sector to the private sector (Tory scum obviously) in an authoritarian lockdown they gleefully imposed. MAD and its nasty siblings of grievance, victimhood and entitlement defines the ideology of not just Labour, but the captured BBC. This is far more potent and twisted than class envy. In this context, do not be surprised by their distaste for a talented man with far superior intellect and far richer wife. This dogma is a now a near totalitarian poison and it exists and propels Biden, Labour, SNP, Lib Dems and maybe half the Tory Rabble. Read their manifestos and listen carefully to their speeches. This is the God to which they bow too. This is the God which is inculacated in our children (along the notion that none will be alive in 10 years time due to the climate emergency).
This is the God whose worship will devour our freedom and prosperity until and unless we recognise and fight it back.
Lets hope! The Anti Discriminatory Mania lies at the very heart of the cultural revolution that has unfolded since Blair introduced his progressive New Order. Scarily, it amounts to a Unified Theory of the 21st century Progressive Left. It is the rage that conciously and sub consciously drives every policy and impulse on the Left. Apply this test to every policy announced by Starmer or denounced by the captured evangelical BBC. What else binds Class War, pro hard Lockdown (remember how the Left attacked efforts to protect only the vulnerable as ‘eugenic’) Anti Tax Cuts,
the silence and cover up of the Grooming Gabgs, the popularity of windfall taxes, them bowing to BLM & Trans fansticism, thr naked destruction of merit in education policy – all, all are driven by this toxic Equality Mania. Nothing is safe. SMEs are the New Kulaks (beware,) and our History the foundation of our ‘white privilege’. And do not think the Mania/cult just feeds off London elite and mad dog in uni groupthink. No – it is embedded and driven by the State and its EQ laws and has spread like a contagion from that base. All young people are rigid with terror at the thought of ever showing discrimination of any form. So many battles are already lost because the BBC and MSM are not going to disavow the feelgood virtue high MAD brings. The war has not even been declared! But war it most certainly is.
I don’t really want us to be a society that desires to “aspire” to the kind of absurd wealth of Rishi Sunak. You’re absolutely right that we should avoid Rayner and her like’s politics of envy, but that doesn’t mean we have to say that it’s fine to amass luxuries indefinitely when one’s neighbour is struggling to feed their children a nutritious diet. That kind of inequality is a recipe for disaster, and not just because of envy, but because it undermines any sense of shared experience.
Universal Credit is a really good example of the danger of being out-of-touch. In theory, it’s a really good benefits system. It puts everything all in one place so you don’t miss benefits you could apply for, and it puts you in contact with a real person who can explain complications to you and help you find new work. However, it also delays payment for an entire month from application, forcing you to take on debt to pay the rent in the meantime. That’s something that can only possibly be designed by someone who’s never had to claim benefits before, as the people who most need it are the ones who have literally no money left.
This doesn’t mean that you should have to have had a particularly poor upbringing to get involved in running anything, no-one’s saying that. But it helps to have experiences that are at least somewhat related to the people your decisions are going to affect.
I understand what you mean about the ability to relate and that inequality is a problem. But I refuse to countenance the argument that aspiring to “absurd” wealth is a bad thing. A free, fair society must allow for that – but it must also provide a basic (I repeat BASIC) safety net for those who fall. Those who shoot for the stars and reap the rewards are going to be the ones financing the safety net. The challenge is not eradicating ambition, but fostering a sense of solidarity. And you can have that without ever having been on the other side of the inequality fence.
I have no objection to allowing it. I’m not suggesting going and seizing rich people’s wealth and creating equality by force. We all know where that leads, and it’s not pretty. I’m speaking of what our culture should encourage. I’m a Christian, so I look to the example of the saints, and they usually find the path to being closer to God is in giving things up rather than accumulating more stuff. Their example, rich or poor, is one of contentment with what they have, and overflowing generosity. They certainly don’t teach “aspiring” to getting more material things. That’s the way of the world, not of Christ. Sorry for the sermon!
You make a good point about the way Universal Credit is constructed to involve a months delay or so before benefits flow. Discussions with intelligent benefits claimants should, as a matter of course, have taken place regarding potential problems before rolling it out. Clearly checks need to take place regarding the genuineness of the claimant to reduce the opportunities for fraud but I am sure a system could be devised to ensure funds were made available to new claimants without such significant delays.
Perhaps no benefits legislation should be enacted without it being considered by a panel of benefits claimants and proper consideration given to issues they raise.
There are three questions that never get answered by those who wish to discredit those who have achieved more in a free society.
How much is too much?
What tax rate is fair?
Who gets to decide the answers?
Throughout history, it appears that having some unfairness and inequality in a free society has always been better than a forced equality that never really exists.
Are labour any better? Jeremy Corbyn grew up in a mansion. Kier is a multimillionaire barrister. No one actually cares.
Besides Rishi’s billionaire status is actually desirable, we want politician’s whose standard of living drops by being a politician. Not people trying to climb the greasy pole, trying to loot the country.
Rishi is a leftist he has pushed for the green levy, and higher taxes. And went along with lockdown which has ruined the economy. And he’s had the nerve to scapegoat truss for the mess he started.
If a drop in the pound to usd of 0.06 took Truss out. He’s been chancellor over a drop of 0.3. Personally I prefer Kemi Badenoch the only one that had any real credibility.
So let me see:
Defence Secretary must have served in all 3 forces
Business Secretary, why a business man of course
Housing minister – a builder obvs
Home Office, harder, do we need a Colonel Blimp or a 1st generation migrant?
Health Secretary, much harder, do they need to have no vices or ailments to be the perfect role model? Or maybe they need to have a heart problem, disability and cancer, or how can they empathise
Why does anybody bother with this childish line of arguement?
Derek Smith
1 year ago
The main issue with Sunak is not his wealth, but his possession of a US Green Card while he was Chancellor, and the questionable non-domiciled tax status of his wife.
UK law permits dual citizenship – I’m not sure of the law on this question as regards high political office, but if it is generally possible for people to have UK citizenship and that of another country, then it may be possible for someone with dual citizenship to become PM. If that is correct – what would be the difference between that an holding a Green Card, which demonstrates a far lower level of loyalty to the US than citizenship would?
(For contrast, Section 44 of the Australian Constitution is generally interpreted as meaning that dual citizens may not stand for election and must take reasonable steps to renounce their other citizenship).
Thanks for the background, Katharine. It’s appreciated.
I would expect any country with permitted dual citizenship to operate a similar attitude to that of Australia as you have described regarding election to high office. It’s strange to think that the UK might not.
The UK is very open: you can stand for election as an MP if you are a British citizen, an Irish citizen or a citizen of a Commonwealth country (subject to certain requirements): https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/electing-mps/candidates/. If this is deemed a problem then it should be changed: every country must decide for itself.
wealthy is a frightfully petit bourgeois term: the man is rich.
Stephen Walsh
1 year ago
To the average voter, £100k per annum is a fortune. So Sunak, Johnson, Truss and Starmer are all the same in that regard, they are all regarded as rich. The issue for Sunak is that the most effective argument for austerity – “there is no magic money tree” – was utterly undermined by his own actions as Chancellor. He presided over the mess he now says needs to be fixed.
The problem is not the absence of a money tree. Clearly there is a money tree. In Germany during the post-WW1 period vast amounts of rapidly depreciating money was printed, which didn’t do the average German much good, and money tree money was provided to keep the economy from imploding during the lockdowns. However, as pretty well every government adopted the same solution reasonable confidence in the currency was maintained in the financial markets. Unfortunately, once Liz Truss decided to rather ostentatiously rely on money tree economics currency traders took fright and sterling sank and borrowing costs rose. Rishi Sunak had enough nouse to predict this so yes he is potentially the man to fix it. Whether he will be able to navigate the choppy waters created by covid lockdowns, quantitive easing and the Ukrainian war and sanctions is certainly not something I would want to predict but I think he has a better chance of doing so than Truss demonstrated and Starmer would be likely to do.
Producing money is never a problem for a government. The trick is to ensure that there is sufficient confidence in it so that it continues to retain value. The problem is not that we don’t have enough money as a country it is that energy is less available. We don’t need more money but we do need more energy.
In the case of Starmer is it not worse. First, while he my not have Sunak’s wealth he has made a lot of money outside Parliament. On current estimates he is worth £7.7m, (far more than Boris) and no doubt a lot of it came from the public purse. Second, he is the leader of a party that actively despises the accumulation of such wealth
chris Barton
1 year ago
The man who maxed out the nations credit, made us all poorer probably forever and debased the currency is in the eyes of Tory MP’s the man to bring about stability? what a strange way of thinking.
“Arsonist posing as a fireman” is my favourite way of putting it.
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago
When have we ever had a poor Conservative leader? The population recognise that the wealth of an individual does not make him incapable of understanding the needs of people less wealthy than him.
Butter and toast are not luxuries up North because Rishi is eating tons of butter every day and burning mounds of toast – the consumption of these commodities are not affected by the consumption of the rich. The problem is that by attempting to relieve the suffering that would have engulfed the country as a result of lockdown Rishi provided vast quantities of free money so that those subsisting on the margins find their money doesn’t go as far as it did.
Should he have allowed the economy to implode during lockdown? Should we have complacently let Putin crush Ukraine if they could and continued to buy oil from Russia?
I considered lockdown was excessive and we should have followed the Swedish model with more care to ensure those in care homes did not have covid infection introduced from the hospitals. But Rishi was not a cheerleader for extreme lockdown. His main error was free money to eat out. But that is not a plan driven by a man too rich to worry about austerity’s affects.
As is often the case in politics the conservatives fortunes rely on external events over which they have in fact little influence. The lady up North might have more chance heating her toast if Rishi were to adopt the policy of Victor Orban and break sanctions and buy Russian oil but is that really a realistic policy that would gain widespread support and would not have other adverse effects?
One of the problems with inflation is that it stimulates those in work to try to recoup what they have lost by demanding inflationary rises. If this succeeds inflation is stimulated – if concessions are not made life is made less tolerable for many by strikes. Rishi will not have a magic bullet for these problems any more than Keir Starmer would have.
Sir Keir Starmer despite his more modest multi-milllionare status than Rishi has no solutions to the problems that beset us only a few ideas to make things worse.
Aaron James
1 year ago
I think this writer misunderstands everything.
Sunak’s level of wealth is not about pools and luxury – it is Power. There is a line crossed in wealth when money is nothing, but power is everything, they have tasted it like a shark in the water…
Think of the last 100 years of the Roman Empire. Emperors lasted a few years till they met their grim death. But back in some distant land another General was beginning marching his Legions to Rome to take the throne – climbing a mountain of people killed and destroyed – he took the Emperor seat – meanwhile a General off in another distant land was marching his Legions to Rome…..all to kill and then die in turn for the chance on the throne. This is man once they pass a level of power, it is madness.
Bill Gates – his unlimited power has him owning half the NGO power in the world. I think he is hugely evil – but by name he is a Philanthropist…He wields more sheer power than any man on earth – but he wants more and more..
”But he is also the ex-Chancellor who planned to raise National Insurance to repair the social care system, and who championed the furlough scheme. On”
With covid response, Net Zero, and Ukraine this is the man who bankrupted Britain – and now he is in charge of fixing it?
He is WEF, Globalist, Great Reseter – he ran the nation’s purse like he is – …… I begin to believe in David Icke’s theory of the pan-dimensional Lizard people running the world
”Communist China Backs World Economic Forum Acolyte Rishi Sunak to Replace Boris Johnson” ” Sunak appeared at the World Economic Forum’s Green Horizon Summit in 2020 to push the idea of a “whole of economy transition” to “green energy” sources. “The challenge of climate change is clear and it is urgent,” Sunak said. “We need to ensure a positive and fair transition to Net Zero and protect our environment.””
“I begin to believe in David Icke’s theory of the pan-dimensional Lizard people running the world” Even if this is fantasy and conspiracist, and we won’t know for sure until it’s too late, it’s pretty clear that all across the world governments are unable to address the problems that we all face. They don’t have the ability to address it but they wont let go of their power. Eventually there’ll be a consensus that we can’t overcome this alone, it’s going to have to be a global effort. Then the WEF will find its opportunity to move.
Didn’t realise this was legit discussion on here thought I might get shot down in flames for mentioning klaus schwab and the great reset 🙂 I’m going to whisper bilderberg and then hide.
If anyone’s read this before what do you think? It was produced by the American intelligence service, have heard tell on other mediums that its a pretty well hashed out idea for what the world will look like depending on a set of different scenarios, very well researched check pg 142 for acknowledgements. People had linked this with WEF and the great reset, the idea being its their plan dependant on the scenarios laid out. I honestly don’t know what to think.
Can’t resist one more, check out Mark Lombardi. https://futuremaps.com/blogs/news/mark-lombardi https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H6Qkk2cCDIQ
The man who mapped the system, so accurately the fbi reportedly used his work, then he came across the Bush Clinton money circles and was found hanged.I’ll go put my tin foil hat back on.
Don’t forget the old Jewish proverb that’s it better to have the Russians turning the gas OFF, than to have the Germans turning it ON.
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago
GDP per capita in the UK peaked in 2006. Between 2007 and 2019 it fell by almost 20 percent – yet most people reading this will have got richer in every one of those years. It’s probably the largest upward transfer of wealth in our history.
Along with money printing and the destruction of the education system, mass immigration has played a large part in this.
The prime culprit is Tony Blair – but the Tories have done little or nothing to reverse the process and it doesn’t seem likely, given his background, that Sunak will do anything to change direction. But then neither will Starmer. Neither party can afford to risk alienating the asset owning class that is now a majority in this country – and the only way out of this is to tax those assets.
So we can look forward to the continued collapse of our public services, further decline in the regions and the continued concentration of ever more wealth in the hands of the metropolitan middle class – whichever party is in power.
How very encouraging, thank you so much.
However along with all the rest of today’s trivia, let us not forget that this day is Saint Crispian’s Day, and recall how beautifully The Bard put it:-
“This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say ‘To-morrow is Saint Crispian:’
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say ‘These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.’
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he’ll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember’d.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember’d;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon SAINT CRISPIN’S DAY!”
This is what they call The Propertocracy. The greatest criminal Sting and con in world economic history. The formula to enrich millions in London/SE & the urban metro classes in uni towns beyond (especially the millionaire club of MPs & politcal class) evolved in the 1990s. A. Trigger mass uncontrolled migration. The gross was some 600,000 every year but no one was counting. B. Do not build any houses to accomodate this tidal wave of free moving people. C. Watch your property grow by 100k a year – untaxed ( funnily enough we never heard BBC journalists worrying about this wealth tax omission!!!). D. Hey presto. You have made a new class of increasingly entitled greedy asset rich propetocrats who are wedded to the preservation of this socially unjust gravy train. Until E. you threaten the Status Quo and mass migratory demand with a referendum on the EU. This class and its terror of change morph into deranged frothing Remainiacs, fearful of a house crash. The Remainer Vote perfectly overlaps with areas of maximum property gain. Check it out. F. They forget and do not care that public services- schools surgeries reservoirs hospitals – all require 5-10 year planning and cannot function in the dark. But that was someone elses problem. And so we arrive in 2022 – and it is OUR problem now. The heroin the propetocracy has been dependent on and addicted too – zero interest rates – is vanishing in supply. The Tories are maintaining the mass migratory demand push but the game is finally up. It is their time to suck up the pain the propetocracy have caused to society as a whole. But will Labour tackle this from their multi million pound 2 kitchen homes in Islington??? You are having a laugh. All – all – are Propertocrats first.
J Bryant
1 year ago
I can’t figure out if the doomster predictions about the coming winter in the UK and Europe are accurate or exaggerations. If they’re accurate, Sunak’s wealth (or anything else about him) is irrelevant. People will suffer this winter and they’ll blame whoever is in charge. The pundits predicting a Labour landslide in the next election will likely be correct.
I don’t envy Sunak. Given the state of the global economy, the premiership looks like a poisoned chalice.
It’s still difficult to get into a restaurant on a Saturday night without a booking.
Some people will suffer this winter. The overwhelming majority will live modern western lives, maybe foregoing a new smart phone, whilst relentlessly being told by the BBC how awful everything is.
Yes, it’s amazing how well some of the “poor” live today. Many of today’s “poor” use $800 devices to order take-away meals, whilst watching a 60″ television mounted to the wall.
Mike F
1 year ago
Call me old fashioned, but the son of an immigrant who has shown ambition, and worked hard to achieve the goals he has set himself, seems a positive choice as prime minister. Would he be considered better suited if he’d made nothing of his priviliged education, dropped out of University, and spent his whole life carping at those who have created the wealth that this country relies on for its public services, like Corbyn?
I thought immigrants were supposed to boost the economy?
I guess if they do too well, they are hated by the Left.
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Let us hope it is NOT a case of “Omnium consensu capax imperii nisi imperasset”- or ‘Everyone agreed he was capable of ruling, until he ruled’.
(Tacitus.)
Edward Seymour
1 year ago
In an aspirational society like ours Mr Sunak’s wealth should be irrelavent to his abilities although a lot of people might well think it shows that he must know what he is talking about. In ny case it’s all a matter of degree. All cabinet ministers, and all who become Prime Minister either are from amongst the most “privileged” or become so. The fact that a gynecologist may be male does not alter his ability or even his empathy for the woman he treats. Mr Sunak, it seems, lives by a strict moral code and we have no reason to suppose that he is unable to empathise with the poor and indeed every reason to suppose that he can have great empathy. However it will be his ability to help society become more prosperous that will be more important than his empathetic qualities.
D Glover
1 year ago
For me, the question over Rishi Sunak is; ‘why?’
He had two homes in the US, one of them in Santa Monica. He was earning a fortune as a hedge fund manager. He had a green card.
Then he decides to return to the UK and try to become an MP. Why?
He’s accepting a huge pay cut and living in Richmond, Yorkshire.
He’s trading the Pacific coast of California for the chilly North Sea coast, to be a Tory backbencher.
Only a paranoid conspiracy theorist would think that he knew he was going to be PM seven years ago. What for,then?
I’ve made more than enough money and want a challenge in a new field?
California is a woke hell hole where it is impossible to have a sensible conversation with my social class who all have blue hair?
I back myself to do well in British politics and if I do I can:
a) give something back to a country that did well by me, or
b) be a something bigger in the emerging world governing structure than I could be as just another multi millionaire?
I’m sure others could add possibilities.
Personally I’d take Richmond over anywhere in California every time.
OK, Some fair points. I’m a bit perplexed by ‘emerging world governing structure’. That sounds like a conspiracy theory all of its own.
Here’s another question;
Richmond became vacant in 2015 because of the elevation of William Hague to the Lords. It is a nailed-on-certainty safe Tory seat.
Rishi Sunak was 35 years old and unknown in British politics. How did he get that juicy plum?
I wasn’t going full Davos/Gates etc. In a visibly changing world as it becomes Multi polar, supply chains repatriate, the U.K. leaves the EU and so on, being the one British PM, rather than one of a large number of rich people, might be considerably more interesting to an ambitious man.
The Richmond question is a good one. Maybe they just don’t get many billionaires applying and assumed an unusual level of talent. Something smellier is equally possible.
Bob Pugh
1 year ago
The difference between modern poverty and historic poverty is the extent of the state support. In the 30’s there was very little state support and in the 50’s and 60’s the benefits system was contributory, if you didn’t pay in you effectively relied on charity for handouts. At some point our social security system switched from being contributory to being an entitlement irrespective of contribution. This changed happened by stealth due to political consensus and as far as I remember was never subject to democratic scrutiny.
All poverty these days is apparently relative which is a complete nonsense as a completely uniform distribution of wealth is not possible of even desirable as there has to be an intensive to motivate endeavour.
It is no surprise that the UK has become a magnate that attracts poor people from all over the world and we have a benefits system that is unaffordable without squeezing the working population to the point they can’t be bothered any more.
How much is needed for a comfortable life? A nice house, a couple of cars, the best education possible for the kids, regular enjoyable holidays, well made clothes that last, plenty of good food, occasional parties and fancy dinners out, plus saving for a rainy day and retirement? Let’s say – and let’s be generous – £300,000 a year. If one is fortunate enough to have more, one should be sufficiently embarrassed to give the surplus away. Not to have it taxed and forcibly taken away by the government, but freely given simply because that’s the right thing to do. I challenge Mr Sunak and all the excessively wealthy to do just that.
How are BTL landlords creating jobs that would not exist if their properties were lived in by owner occupiers? And I’m not talking about jobs for bankers in Jersey….
There are those jobs that result largely from the spending by the wealthy. Yacht builders, caterers, organic farmers, auto workers, oil/gas workers, chocolatiers, diamond merchants, waiters, sommeliers, butlers, home builders, painters, travel agents, bar tenders, masons, electricians, plumbers and HVAC workers, landscapers, pool maintenance, gardeners, interior designers, lawyers, CPA’s, CFP’s, maids, nannies, private school teachers and administrators, masseuse’s, plastic surgeons and cult leaders of all stripes.
A lot of our troubles as a country stem from that unexamined claim that ‘property generates income as well as creating jobs etc’. It does – but the (few, non-incremental) jobs are menial and unproductive, and the income generally goes to unproductive areas. What generates evenly distributed income and productivity is investment in (guess what) productive assets, rather than wealth traps. Inflating the value of an unproductive asset is a pointless and unstable exercise, as we are discovering.
Don’t forget the Staffies for bit of dog fighting and the Patterdales for a bit of ratting! Then off to County Meath for some Badger digging.
Matt M
1 year ago
I find the current news cycle reminiscent of 2012-2015 when every journalist (except, if i remember correctly, for Dan Hodges) was forecasting a Labour victory at the next election. The bookies had a Tory majority as 25/1. The reasons given were the “austerity” policies, the threat of UKIP and the gulf between the Eton/Westminster posh boys in No10 and 11 and the general public.
I think it is just as likely as 2015 that Rishi leads the Conservatives to victory at the next election. Though I will wait until he has had at least 48 days in office to make any firm predictions 😉
Last edited 1 year ago by Matt M
Steven Carr
1 year ago
‘ Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Tim Brooke-Taylor and Marty Feldman’
Barry Cryer was in the Four Yorkkshiremen sketch too.
Tell the young un’s that today, and they won’t believe you.
Deb Grant
1 year ago
Dear me, what sort of society are we creating when we trash success and make the ridiculous assumption that an MP wouldn’t understand the most pressing problems people face? A couple of hours in an MP’s surgery should cure that stupid notion. MP”s have all the stats, they know the issues. Much more than the blank pages that are young, ideological students pushing ‘socialism.’
Ask yourselves why would a brilliant person like Rishi Sunak bother to do such a thankless job if it wasn’t the desire to make Britain a better place for everyone? There was a time you had to be fairly well off to afford to be an MP. Shouldn’t we also like the idea that he couldn’t be bribed because he doesn’t need the money. Would anybody much now be British PM just for kudos? Not any more.
William Shaw
1 year ago
He’s only been in office for a few hours and BBC commentators are already working to undermine and denigrate him.
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
In the US, “Lunchbox Joe” from the coalpitsofScranton, became wildly wealthy selling influence to America’s enemies through his degenerate drug addict son. Be glad your new PM is smart, skilled, experienced, and doesn’t need to be guided off stage by invisible hand shakers.
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Interesting that Britain’s plummet from global power co-incided with it being handed over to the middle classes? The greatest politicians of the 19th Century did not need the job… ditto Rishi.
John Pade
1 year ago
Giving 500 million of their fortune to that food bank would clear the decks. Critics would be stunned into silence. Challenged by an act of generosity to the point of discomfort (if not pain) they would be revealed as pathetic moral weaklings. Expressions about feeling others pain, mournful expressions while visiting soup kitchens, heartfelt speeches, all those worn out attempts to garner favorable publicity would be turned on their heads by an act of substantial sacrifice.
Michael Davis
1 year ago
My Dad used to say vote conservative. Labour will steal your money but the Conservatives already have and don’t need any more
Alan Thorpe
1 year ago
If we have to experience something to understand it, it means history is effectively invented and scientific discovery impossible.
Alan Hawkes
1 year ago
I live in the prosperous market town of Saffron Walden. Some years ago a letter appeared in the local paper suggesting that we needed a Foodbank. The letter was badly argued and I responded, to its content, somewhat negatively. But I also wrote, privately to its author, who was writing on behalf of a local church, that if there was a need I could help.
It became apparent that there was an almost invisible level of poverty hidden within our community.
To cut a long story short I ended up helping found a Foodbank and became its manager.
I am also a member of the Conservative Party, which led to some interesting debates within the ‘foodbank’ community.
Our clients were not the normal, long term clients of most Foodbanks. Ours tended to have short-term problems, which we could help them through, though for the individuals involved they were make or break crises.
So, I regard any debate about Rishi’s wealth as a distraction. As Mrs Thatcher pointed out, the Good Samaritan had spare cash.
j watson
1 year ago
Even if one didn’t agree with his politics one can appreciate that he appears a v hard working driven individual, determined on a career in public service. His own background wasn’t massively privileged, but he did benefit from considerable schooling advantages open to v few. Let’s hope he remembers that if/when talking about how meritocratic we really are. However so as it happens did Atlee and arguably no 20th century PM did more for the poor.
Perhaps the more intriguing thing now is what he does about non-dom status? He and we know the British public does not support this form of tax avoidance now it’s began to understand this. His family has benefitted from this status, We have a tax-take gap unless we are going to cut public services, and thus it seems an obvious ‘kill two birds with one stone’ option for him to show his fairness credentials. We’ll see perhaps in a couple of weeks the depth of integrity.
He doesn’t have non-dom status. His wife did, and was perfectly entitled to it under the law, so the point about tax avoidance is disingenuous. Do you have an ISA?
As I understand it, his wife has has renounced her non-dom status, following the standard BBC hatchet job on anyone in public life who has accumulated what they deem to be excess wealth. £30 coffee mugs, how dare they!
No matter that her father founded a business 40 years ago that has become the flagship for Indian entrepreneurial success and today provides well paid employment for hundreds of thousands of people.
It’s not his money that worries me – money is just a number – no, it’s the power that he has. He is the most powerful person in the country, how can we trust him not to use that power to his own advantage? How could he possibly relate to the the average powerless Brit? We need someone with no power, who can therefore be trusted not to abuse it, and who understands what it is to be ineffectual: Bring back Liz Truss!
not the leounge, settee, toilet cruet poly nylon reound veowel seound caste…or the beard and white plimsoll, black 4×4 windowed , Courtenay and Tyger Jayde children caste, or the golf club heome ceounties caste…. that’ll do for me!
The logic of this argument demands that the UK is led by someone whose wealth/social struggle background is their most important characteristic, not their competence/intelligence. That is not good.
That means being led by the likes of Angela Rayner – is that the superior alternative? The politics of envy that will now be washing over from Labour is going to be tough to watch.
Not least because it is so hypocritical: support ethnic minorities…but only until they either display a tendency to think for themselves (how dare they!) and choose the “wrong” party or – God forbid – integrate and do really well for themselves. Then the knives really come out.
The complaints being levelled at Rishi in this article – if they do become a widespread phenomenon – point to a society that no longer understands or desires aspiration. Its aim is enforced mediocrity and whinging.
Aspiration is fine. The salary is fine. But the woeful lack of understanding of how the majority live is not good enough. “Let them eat cake” springs to mind. And his wife’s questionable tax status….
His wife’s tax status was legal. It was more a case of the optics – and the question whether things which are legal are also morally OK.I thought Sunak rose to the challenge of that question well: saying that Akshata is his wife, not his possession and she makes her own decisions. He showed himself to be a modern man.
I understand the difficulty in identifying with Sunak, with his sharp suits, Peloton bikes and stupidly expensive coffee cups…but there again – why did all the Red Wall voters love Boris so? Sunak knows far more about living in modest circumstances than Boris ever will.
I am not sure of the relevance of his wife’s tax status. She is Indian and owns shares in her parents Indian company, that makes her very rich. Won’t stop the mud slinging though.
Yes, reminds me of Dennis Healey being criticised when his wife had private medical treatment. He made a similar reply.
Knowing how to build a substantial fortune seems to me to be a better qualification for running a country than knowing how to collect benefits.
The glory of a democracy is that he will also have to have the intelligence to find out what bothers voters who don’t share his background if he wants to stay in post.
surely not? I want lower middles with ” reound veowel seounds” corfam shoes, a desperation to hang on to their jobs at any cost who will lie and cheat so to do?
Spot on! the truth is that furlough has made the country lazy – particularly the medical profession and others in the public sector who want the money without working for it
Its more than just lazy. Lockdown madness has had a revolutionary impact on cultural values. The State promised whatever it takes..a magic money tree. A hooman right and entitlement to prosperity was made manifest. The primacy of individual and family responsibility was torched. The collapse in working values in DVLA and GP surgeries was a malign offshoot of this re balancing of our relationship to a Big Brother State.
Why do you suggest Rishi has a “woefully lack of understanding of how the majority live”? He was not born to great wealth. His father was a GP and his mother a pharmacist in a small pharmacy. His brother works as a psychologist and his sister a civil servant. While this is far from a background of life on the dole very few politicians do not come from very similar backgrounds. To suggest he is some Marie Antoinette figure who has no concept of ordinary life is both absurd and dishonest.
The fact that he made money and married well does not negate a pretty average middle class background.
Well said.
Am I right in thinking Sir Keir Starmer was brought up in poverty in the Slums of Reigate!!!??
This is the usual left-wing stuff which conflates the income of the Prime Minister with that of those on minimum incomes. Rishi Sunak’s competence and integrity are traits which should be celebrated not banging on about his wife’s income. It is like criticising people for the colour of their skin or their upbringing over which they had no control..
Rishi Sunak has shown that he attaches importance to directing government aid principally to those most in need. It’s the policies that count, regardless of life experiences.
You don’t need to be rich to not understand how over people live work.
What manifest rubbish! Perhaps you might like to have a look at the great politicians who made this country during the 19th Century, and whose wealth, altruism, nobility and belief in and, sense of duty, made their wealth ensure that they did not need the job.
Surely even those possessing the classic shoe sized IQ can manage to work out that those who need the job by virtue of otherwise impecuniosity and quasi unemployability, coupled with a deluded middle class sense of faux grandeur and peer group adoration, are, like Boris Johnson, merely faux dictators?
Just look at the Shapps , the Private Pike creature and the fireplace salesmen? In the days of Gladstone, Peel and Liverpool they would have been lucky to have been employed as footman!
At last – someone who recognises the true nature of the dogma which possesses the Progressive Left; the cult of Equality. It manifests itself also an an anti discriminatory mania – call it MAD – and also drives the obsession with Diversity. This mania explains everything about our moral, spirtual and socio-economic collapse and all of the Biden and Starmer programmes. Meritocracy has been crushed. Take education. The best students are banished from Oxbridge. Grammar schools opposed and private schools set to be attacked. It explains the toxic hysteria which greeted the attempt to reduce taxes for the wealth creators. All tax policy exists only to redistribute to the ‘poor’. Profit and enterprise and growth are now all seen as harmful discriminatory concepts, hence the callous indifference of the Blob and Public Sector to the private sector (Tory scum obviously) in an authoritarian lockdown they gleefully imposed. MAD and its nasty siblings of grievance, victimhood and entitlement defines the ideology of not just Labour, but the captured BBC. This is far more potent and twisted than class envy. In this context, do not be surprised by their distaste for a talented man with far superior intellect and far richer wife. This dogma is a now a near totalitarian poison and it exists and propels Biden, Labour, SNP, Lib Dems and maybe half the Tory Rabble. Read their manifestos and listen carefully to their speeches. This is the God to which they bow too. This is the God which is inculacated in our children (along the notion that none will be alive in 10 years time due to the climate emergency).
This is the God whose worship will devour our freedom and prosperity until and unless we recognise and fight it back.
All true
You’ve masterfully hit the proverbial nail on the head!
Lets hope! The Anti Discriminatory Mania lies at the very heart of the cultural revolution that has unfolded since Blair introduced his progressive New Order. Scarily, it amounts to a Unified Theory of the 21st century Progressive Left. It is the rage that conciously and sub consciously drives every policy and impulse on the Left. Apply this test to every policy announced by Starmer or denounced by the captured evangelical BBC. What else binds Class War, pro hard Lockdown (remember how the Left attacked efforts to protect only the vulnerable as ‘eugenic’) Anti Tax Cuts,
the silence and cover up of the Grooming Gabgs, the popularity of windfall taxes, them bowing to BLM & Trans fansticism, thr naked destruction of merit in education policy – all, all are driven by this toxic Equality Mania. Nothing is safe. SMEs are the New Kulaks (beware,) and our History the foundation of our ‘white privilege’. And do not think the Mania/cult just feeds off London elite and mad dog in uni groupthink. No – it is embedded and driven by the State and its EQ laws and has spread like a contagion from that base. All young people are rigid with terror at the thought of ever showing discrimination of any form. So many battles are already lost because the BBC and MSM are not going to disavow the feelgood virtue high MAD brings. The war has not even been declared! But war it most certainly is.
Marvellous, Walter.
I don’t really want us to be a society that desires to “aspire” to the kind of absurd wealth of Rishi Sunak. You’re absolutely right that we should avoid Rayner and her like’s politics of envy, but that doesn’t mean we have to say that it’s fine to amass luxuries indefinitely when one’s neighbour is struggling to feed their children a nutritious diet. That kind of inequality is a recipe for disaster, and not just because of envy, but because it undermines any sense of shared experience.
Universal Credit is a really good example of the danger of being out-of-touch. In theory, it’s a really good benefits system. It puts everything all in one place so you don’t miss benefits you could apply for, and it puts you in contact with a real person who can explain complications to you and help you find new work. However, it also delays payment for an entire month from application, forcing you to take on debt to pay the rent in the meantime. That’s something that can only possibly be designed by someone who’s never had to claim benefits before, as the people who most need it are the ones who have literally no money left.
This doesn’t mean that you should have to have had a particularly poor upbringing to get involved in running anything, no-one’s saying that. But it helps to have experiences that are at least somewhat related to the people your decisions are going to affect.
I understand what you mean about the ability to relate and that inequality is a problem. But I refuse to countenance the argument that aspiring to “absurd” wealth is a bad thing. A free, fair society must allow for that – but it must also provide a basic (I repeat BASIC) safety net for those who fall. Those who shoot for the stars and reap the rewards are going to be the ones financing the safety net. The challenge is not eradicating ambition, but fostering a sense of solidarity. And you can have that without ever having been on the other side of the inequality fence.
I have no objection to allowing it. I’m not suggesting going and seizing rich people’s wealth and creating equality by force. We all know where that leads, and it’s not pretty. I’m speaking of what our culture should encourage. I’m a Christian, so I look to the example of the saints, and they usually find the path to being closer to God is in giving things up rather than accumulating more stuff. Their example, rich or poor, is one of contentment with what they have, and overflowing generosity. They certainly don’t teach “aspiring” to getting more material things. That’s the way of the world, not of Christ. Sorry for the sermon!
You make a good point about the way Universal Credit is constructed to involve a months delay or so before benefits flow. Discussions with intelligent benefits claimants should, as a matter of course, have taken place regarding potential problems before rolling it out. Clearly checks need to take place regarding the genuineness of the claimant to reduce the opportunities for fraud but I am sure a system could be devised to ensure funds were made available to new claimants without such significant delays.
Perhaps no benefits legislation should be enacted without it being considered by a panel of benefits claimants and proper consideration given to issues they raise.
There are three questions that never get answered by those who wish to discredit those who have achieved more in a free society.
Throughout history, it appears that having some unfairness and inequality in a free society has always been better than a forced equality that never really exists.
no, absolutely! lets have a seething pit of mediocrity! lets go for the below average, to compromise… God help us…
Are labour any better? Jeremy Corbyn grew up in a mansion. Kier is a multimillionaire barrister. No one actually cares.
Besides Rishi’s billionaire status is actually desirable, we want politician’s whose standard of living drops by being a politician. Not people trying to climb the greasy pole, trying to loot the country.
Rishi is a leftist he has pushed for the green levy, and higher taxes. And went along with lockdown which has ruined the economy. And he’s had the nerve to scapegoat truss for the mess he started.
If a drop in the pound to usd of 0.06 took Truss out. He’s been chancellor over a drop of 0.3.
Personally I prefer Kemi Badenoch the only one that had any real credibility.
So let me see:
Defence Secretary must have served in all 3 forces
Business Secretary, why a business man of course
Housing minister – a builder obvs
Home Office, harder, do we need a Colonel Blimp or a 1st generation migrant?
Health Secretary, much harder, do they need to have no vices or ailments to be the perfect role model? Or maybe they need to have a heart problem, disability and cancer, or how can they empathise
Why does anybody bother with this childish line of arguement?
The main issue with Sunak is not his wealth, but his possession of a US Green Card while he was Chancellor, and the questionable non-domiciled tax status of his wife.
Why the issue of the green card? It’s not citizenship, just a residency permit. Boris was a US citizen until recently.
Shall we just stick to career politicians of that absolves us of envy?
It is not a question of envy, but of loyalty.
Do you think it is right for someone to be in charge of a nation’s finances while holding permanent residency status in another country?
UK law permits dual citizenship – I’m not sure of the law on this question as regards high political office, but if it is generally possible for people to have UK citizenship and that of another country, then it may be possible for someone with dual citizenship to become PM. If that is correct – what would be the difference between that an holding a Green Card, which demonstrates a far lower level of loyalty to the US than citizenship would?
(For contrast, Section 44 of the Australian Constitution is generally interpreted as meaning that dual citizens may not stand for election and must take reasonable steps to renounce their other citizenship).
Thanks for the background, Katharine. It’s appreciated.
I would expect any country with permitted dual citizenship to operate a similar attitude to that of Australia as you have described regarding election to high office. It’s strange to think that the UK might not.
The UK is very open: you can stand for election as an MP if you are a British citizen, an Irish citizen or a citizen of a Commonwealth country (subject to certain requirements): https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/electing-mps/candidates/. If this is deemed a problem then it should be changed: every country must decide for itself.
I’m more concerned with Mr Hunt’s rather obvious Chinese connection.
wealthy is a frightfully petit bourgeois term: the man is rich.
To the average voter, £100k per annum is a fortune. So Sunak, Johnson, Truss and Starmer are all the same in that regard, they are all regarded as rich. The issue for Sunak is that the most effective argument for austerity – “there is no magic money tree” – was utterly undermined by his own actions as Chancellor. He presided over the mess he now says needs to be fixed.
The problem is not the absence of a money tree. Clearly there is a money tree. In Germany during the post-WW1 period vast amounts of rapidly depreciating money was printed, which didn’t do the average German much good, and money tree money was provided to keep the economy from imploding during the lockdowns. However, as pretty well every government adopted the same solution reasonable confidence in the currency was maintained in the financial markets. Unfortunately, once Liz Truss decided to rather ostentatiously rely on money tree economics currency traders took fright and sterling sank and borrowing costs rose. Rishi Sunak had enough nouse to predict this so yes he is potentially the man to fix it. Whether he will be able to navigate the choppy waters created by covid lockdowns, quantitive easing and the Ukrainian war and sanctions is certainly not something I would want to predict but I think he has a better chance of doing so than Truss demonstrated and Starmer would be likely to do.
Producing money is never a problem for a government. The trick is to ensure that there is sufficient confidence in it so that it continues to retain value. The problem is not that we don’t have enough money as a country it is that energy is less available. We don’t need more money but we do need more energy.
In the case of Starmer is it not worse. First, while he my not have Sunak’s wealth he has made a lot of money outside Parliament. On current estimates he is worth £7.7m, (far more than Boris) and no doubt a lot of it came from the public purse. Second, he is the leader of a party that actively despises the accumulation of such wealth
The man who maxed out the nations credit, made us all poorer probably forever and debased the currency is in the eyes of Tory MP’s the man to bring about stability? what a strange way of thinking.
“Arsonist posing as a fireman” is my favourite way of putting it.
When have we ever had a poor Conservative leader? The population recognise that the wealth of an individual does not make him incapable of understanding the needs of people less wealthy than him.
Butter and toast are not luxuries up North because Rishi is eating tons of butter every day and burning mounds of toast – the consumption of these commodities are not affected by the consumption of the rich. The problem is that by attempting to relieve the suffering that would have engulfed the country as a result of lockdown Rishi provided vast quantities of free money so that those subsisting on the margins find their money doesn’t go as far as it did.
Should he have allowed the economy to implode during lockdown? Should we have complacently let Putin crush Ukraine if they could and continued to buy oil from Russia?
I considered lockdown was excessive and we should have followed the Swedish model with more care to ensure those in care homes did not have covid infection introduced from the hospitals. But Rishi was not a cheerleader for extreme lockdown. His main error was free money to eat out. But that is not a plan driven by a man too rich to worry about austerity’s affects.
As is often the case in politics the conservatives fortunes rely on external events over which they have in fact little influence. The lady up North might have more chance heating her toast if Rishi were to adopt the policy of Victor Orban and break sanctions and buy Russian oil but is that really a realistic policy that would gain widespread support and would not have other adverse effects?
One of the problems with inflation is that it stimulates those in work to try to recoup what they have lost by demanding inflationary rises. If this succeeds inflation is stimulated – if concessions are not made life is made less tolerable for many by strikes. Rishi will not have a magic bullet for these problems any more than Keir Starmer would have.
Sir Keir Starmer despite his more modest multi-milllionare status than Rishi has no solutions to the problems that beset us only a few ideas to make things worse.
I think this writer misunderstands everything.
Sunak’s level of wealth is not about pools and luxury – it is Power. There is a line crossed in wealth when money is nothing, but power is everything, they have tasted it like a shark in the water…
Think of the last 100 years of the Roman Empire. Emperors lasted a few years till they met their grim death. But back in some distant land another General was beginning marching his Legions to Rome to take the throne – climbing a mountain of people killed and destroyed – he took the Emperor seat – meanwhile a General off in another distant land was marching his Legions to Rome…..all to kill and then die in turn for the chance on the throne. This is man once they pass a level of power, it is madness.
Bill Gates – his unlimited power has him owning half the NGO power in the world. I think he is hugely evil – but by name he is a Philanthropist…He wields more sheer power than any man on earth – but he wants more and more..
”But he is also the ex-Chancellor who planned to raise National Insurance to repair the social care system, and who championed the furlough scheme. On”
With covid response, Net Zero, and Ukraine this is the man who bankrupted Britain – and now he is in charge of fixing it?
He is WEF, Globalist, Great Reseter – he ran the nation’s purse like he is – …… I begin to believe in David Icke’s theory of the pan-dimensional Lizard people running the world
”Communist China Backs World Economic Forum Acolyte Rishi Sunak to Replace Boris Johnson”
” Sunak appeared at the World Economic Forum’s Green Horizon Summit in 2020 to push the idea of a “whole of economy transition” to “green energy” sources.
“The challenge of climate change is clear and it is urgent,” Sunak said. “We need to ensure a positive and fair transition to Net Zero and protect our environment.””
Going to be a cold winter….
“I begin to believe in David Icke’s theory of the pan-dimensional Lizard people running the world”
Even if this is fantasy and conspiracist, and we won’t know for sure until it’s too late, it’s pretty clear that all across the world governments are unable to address the problems that we all face. They don’t have the ability to address it but they wont let go of their power. Eventually there’ll be a consensus that we can’t overcome this alone, it’s going to have to be a global effort. Then the WEF will find its opportunity to move.
Didn’t realise this was legit discussion on here thought I might get shot down in flames for mentioning klaus schwab and the great reset 🙂 I’m going to whisper bilderberg and then hide.
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/GlobalTrends_2040.pdf
If anyone’s read this before what do you think? It was produced by the American intelligence service, have heard tell on other mediums that its a pretty well hashed out idea for what the world will look like depending on a set of different scenarios, very well researched check pg 142 for acknowledgements. People had linked this with WEF and the great reset, the idea being its their plan dependant on the scenarios laid out. I honestly don’t know what to think.
Can’t resist one more, check out Mark Lombardi.
https://futuremaps.com/blogs/news/mark-lombardi
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H6Qkk2cCDIQ
The man who mapped the system, so accurately the fbi reportedly used his work, then he came across the Bush Clinton money circles and was found hanged.I’ll go put my tin foil hat back on.
Don’t forget the old Jewish proverb that’s it better to have the Russians turning the gas OFF, than to have the Germans turning it ON.
GDP per capita in the UK peaked in 2006. Between 2007 and 2019 it fell by almost 20 percent – yet most people reading this will have got richer in every one of those years. It’s probably the largest upward transfer of wealth in our history.
Along with money printing and the destruction of the education system, mass immigration has played a large part in this.
The prime culprit is Tony Blair – but the Tories have done little or nothing to reverse the process and it doesn’t seem likely, given his background, that Sunak will do anything to change direction. But then neither will Starmer. Neither party can afford to risk alienating the asset owning class that is now a majority in this country – and the only way out of this is to tax those assets.
So we can look forward to the continued collapse of our public services, further decline in the regions and the continued concentration of ever more wealth in the hands of the metropolitan middle class – whichever party is in power.
How very encouraging, thank you so much.
However along with all the rest of today’s trivia, let us not forget that this day is Saint Crispian’s Day, and recall how beautifully The Bard put it:-
“This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say ‘To-morrow is Saint Crispian:’
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say ‘These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.’
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he’ll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember’d.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember’d;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon SAINT CRISPIN’S DAY!”
“yet most people reading this will have got richer”: I am not sure about that.
This is what they call The Propertocracy. The greatest criminal Sting and con in world economic history. The formula to enrich millions in London/SE & the urban metro classes in uni towns beyond (especially the millionaire club of MPs & politcal class) evolved in the 1990s. A. Trigger mass uncontrolled migration. The gross was some 600,000 every year but no one was counting. B. Do not build any houses to accomodate this tidal wave of free moving people. C. Watch your property grow by 100k a year – untaxed ( funnily enough we never heard BBC journalists worrying about this wealth tax omission!!!). D. Hey presto. You have made a new class of increasingly entitled greedy asset rich propetocrats who are wedded to the preservation of this socially unjust gravy train. Until E. you threaten the Status Quo and mass migratory demand with a referendum on the EU. This class and its terror of change morph into deranged frothing Remainiacs, fearful of a house crash. The Remainer Vote perfectly overlaps with areas of maximum property gain. Check it out. F. They forget and do not care that public services- schools surgeries reservoirs hospitals – all require 5-10 year planning and cannot function in the dark. But that was someone elses problem. And so we arrive in 2022 – and it is OUR problem now. The heroin the propetocracy has been dependent on and addicted too – zero interest rates – is vanishing in supply. The Tories are maintaining the mass migratory demand push but the game is finally up. It is their time to suck up the pain the propetocracy have caused to society as a whole. But will Labour tackle this from their multi million pound 2 kitchen homes in Islington??? You are having a laugh. All – all – are Propertocrats first.
I can’t figure out if the doomster predictions about the coming winter in the UK and Europe are accurate or exaggerations. If they’re accurate, Sunak’s wealth (or anything else about him) is irrelevant. People will suffer this winter and they’ll blame whoever is in charge. The pundits predicting a Labour landslide in the next election will likely be correct.
I don’t envy Sunak. Given the state of the global economy, the premiership looks like a poisoned chalice.
It’s still difficult to get into a restaurant on a Saturday night without a booking.
Some people will suffer this winter. The overwhelming majority will live modern western lives, maybe foregoing a new smart phone, whilst relentlessly being told by the BBC how awful everything is.
Yes, it’s amazing how well some of the “poor” live today. Many of today’s “poor” use $800 devices to order take-away meals, whilst watching a 60″ television mounted to the wall.
Call me old fashioned, but the son of an immigrant who has shown ambition, and worked hard to achieve the goals he has set himself, seems a positive choice as prime minister. Would he be considered better suited if he’d made nothing of his priviliged education, dropped out of University, and spent his whole life carping at those who have created the wealth that this country relies on for its public services, like Corbyn?
I thought immigrants were supposed to boost the economy?
I guess if they do too well, they are hated by the Left.
Let us hope it is NOT a case of “Omnium consensu capax imperii nisi imperasset”- or ‘Everyone agreed he was capable of ruling, until he ruled’.
(Tacitus.)
In an aspirational society like ours Mr Sunak’s wealth should be irrelavent to his abilities although a lot of people might well think it shows that he must know what he is talking about. In ny case it’s all a matter of degree. All cabinet ministers, and all who become Prime Minister either are from amongst the most “privileged” or become so. The fact that a gynecologist may be male does not alter his ability or even his empathy for the woman he treats. Mr Sunak, it seems, lives by a strict moral code and we have no reason to suppose that he is unable to empathise with the poor and indeed every reason to suppose that he can have great empathy. However it will be his ability to help society become more prosperous that will be more important than his empathetic qualities.
For me, the question over Rishi Sunak is; ‘why?’
He had two homes in the US, one of them in Santa Monica. He was earning a fortune as a hedge fund manager. He had a green card.
Then he decides to return to the UK and try to become an MP. Why?
He’s accepting a huge pay cut and living in Richmond, Yorkshire.
He’s trading the Pacific coast of California for the chilly North Sea coast, to be a Tory backbencher.
Only a paranoid conspiracy theorist would think that he knew he was going to be PM seven years ago. What for,then?
I’ve made more than enough money and want a challenge in a new field?
California is a woke hell hole where it is impossible to have a sensible conversation with my social class who all have blue hair?
I back myself to do well in British politics and if I do I can:
a) give something back to a country that did well by me, or
b) be a something bigger in the emerging world governing structure than I could be as just another multi millionaire?
I’m sure others could add possibilities.
Personally I’d take Richmond over anywhere in California every time.
OK, Some fair points. I’m a bit perplexed by ‘emerging world governing structure’. That sounds like a conspiracy theory all of its own.
Here’s another question;
Richmond became vacant in 2015 because of the elevation of William Hague to the Lords. It is a nailed-on-certainty safe Tory seat.
Rishi Sunak was 35 years old and unknown in British politics. How did he get that juicy plum?
I wasn’t going full Davos/Gates etc. In a visibly changing world as it becomes Multi polar, supply chains repatriate, the U.K. leaves the EU and so on, being the one British PM, rather than one of a large number of rich people, might be considerably more interesting to an ambitious man.
The Richmond question is a good one. Maybe they just don’t get many billionaires applying and assumed an unusual level of talent. Something smellier is equally possible.
The difference between modern poverty and historic poverty is the extent of the state support. In the 30’s there was very little state support and in the 50’s and 60’s the benefits system was contributory, if you didn’t pay in you effectively relied on charity for handouts. At some point our social security system switched from being contributory to being an entitlement irrespective of contribution. This changed happened by stealth due to political consensus and as far as I remember was never subject to democratic scrutiny.
All poverty these days is apparently relative which is a complete nonsense as a completely uniform distribution of wealth is not possible of even desirable as there has to be an intensive to motivate endeavour.
It is no surprise that the UK has become a magnate that attracts poor people from all over the world and we have a benefits system that is unaffordable without squeezing the working population to the point they can’t be bothered any more.
Fair point but not “magnate” but “magnet” surely?
Do you have to be a subject of His Majesty to be PM? Or could the Tory’s just ask Jordan Peterson?
who he?
How much is needed for a comfortable life? A nice house, a couple of cars, the best education possible for the kids, regular enjoyable holidays, well made clothes that last, plenty of good food, occasional parties and fancy dinners out, plus saving for a rainy day and retirement? Let’s say – and let’s be generous – £300,000 a year. If one is fortunate enough to have more, one should be sufficiently embarrassed to give the surplus away. Not to have it taxed and forcibly taken away by the government, but freely given simply because that’s the right thing to do. I challenge Mr Sunak and all the excessively wealthy to do just that.
Yes they should. But they won’t. How we live in a world where there are billionaires baffles me.
Unfortunately most of the surplus and unearned wealth in this country is held in property – and it’s difficult to give that away piecemeal.
Yes, and the property generates income, as well as creating jobs, etc. I’m talking about income not capital.
How are BTL landlords creating jobs that would not exist if their properties were lived in by owner occupiers? And I’m not talking about jobs for bankers in Jersey….
There are those jobs that result largely from the spending by the wealthy. Yacht builders, caterers, organic farmers, auto workers, oil/gas workers, chocolatiers, diamond merchants, waiters, sommeliers, butlers, home builders, painters, travel agents, bar tenders, masons, electricians, plumbers and HVAC workers, landscapers, pool maintenance, gardeners, interior designers, lawyers, CPA’s, CFP’s, maids, nannies, private school teachers and administrators, masseuse’s, plastic surgeons and cult leaders of all stripes.
A lot of our troubles as a country stem from that unexamined claim that ‘property generates income as well as creating jobs etc’. It does – but the (few, non-incremental) jobs are menial and unproductive, and the income generally goes to unproductive areas. What generates evenly distributed income and productivity is investment in (guess what) productive assets, rather than wealth traps. Inflating the value of an unproductive asset is a pointless and unstable exercise, as we are discovering.
Why?
What about the biblical concept of the tithe? If God only wanted 10%, who are we to demand more?
Decent horses to Hunt, terriers and lurchers, a pair of decent guns, never having to go abroad, good racing…?
Don’t forget the Staffies for bit of dog fighting and the Patterdales for a bit of ratting! Then off to County Meath for some Badger digging.
I find the current news cycle reminiscent of 2012-2015 when every journalist (except, if i remember correctly, for Dan Hodges) was forecasting a Labour victory at the next election. The bookies had a Tory majority as 25/1. The reasons given were the “austerity” policies, the threat of UKIP and the gulf between the Eton/Westminster posh boys in No10 and 11 and the general public.
I think it is just as likely as 2015 that Rishi leads the Conservatives to victory at the next election. Though I will wait until he has had at least 48 days in office to make any firm predictions 😉
‘ Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Tim Brooke-Taylor and Marty Feldman’
Barry Cryer was in the Four Yorkkshiremen sketch too.
Tell the young un’s that today, and they won’t believe you.
Dear me, what sort of society are we creating when we trash success and make the ridiculous assumption that an MP wouldn’t understand the most pressing problems people face? A couple of hours in an MP’s surgery should cure that stupid notion. MP”s have all the stats, they know the issues. Much more than the blank pages that are young, ideological students pushing ‘socialism.’
Ask yourselves why would a brilliant person like Rishi Sunak bother to do such a thankless job if it wasn’t the desire to make Britain a better place for everyone? There was a time you had to be fairly well off to afford to be an MP. Shouldn’t we also like the idea that he couldn’t be bribed because he doesn’t need the money. Would anybody much now be British PM just for kudos? Not any more.
He’s only been in office for a few hours and BBC commentators are already working to undermine and denigrate him.
In the US, “Lunchbox Joe” from the coal pits of Scranton, became wildly wealthy selling influence to America’s enemies through his degenerate drug addict son. Be glad your new PM is smart, skilled, experienced, and doesn’t need to be guided off stage by invisible hand shakers.
Interesting that Britain’s plummet from global power co-incided with it being handed over to the middle classes? The greatest politicians of the 19th Century did not need the job… ditto Rishi.
Giving 500 million of their fortune to that food bank would clear the decks. Critics would be stunned into silence. Challenged by an act of generosity to the point of discomfort (if not pain) they would be revealed as pathetic moral weaklings. Expressions about feeling others pain, mournful expressions while visiting soup kitchens, heartfelt speeches, all those worn out attempts to garner favorable publicity would be turned on their heads by an act of substantial sacrifice.
My Dad used to say vote conservative. Labour will steal your money but the Conservatives already have and don’t need any more
If we have to experience something to understand it, it means history is effectively invented and scientific discovery impossible.
I live in the prosperous market town of Saffron Walden. Some years ago a letter appeared in the local paper suggesting that we needed a Foodbank. The letter was badly argued and I responded, to its content, somewhat negatively. But I also wrote, privately to its author, who was writing on behalf of a local church, that if there was a need I could help.
It became apparent that there was an almost invisible level of poverty hidden within our community.
To cut a long story short I ended up helping found a Foodbank and became its manager.
I am also a member of the Conservative Party, which led to some interesting debates within the ‘foodbank’ community.
Our clients were not the normal, long term clients of most Foodbanks. Ours tended to have short-term problems, which we could help them through, though for the individuals involved they were make or break crises.
So, I regard any debate about Rishi’s wealth as a distraction. As Mrs Thatcher pointed out, the Good Samaritan had spare cash.
Even if one didn’t agree with his politics one can appreciate that he appears a v hard working driven individual, determined on a career in public service. His own background wasn’t massively privileged, but he did benefit from considerable schooling advantages open to v few. Let’s hope he remembers that if/when talking about how meritocratic we really are. However so as it happens did Atlee and arguably no 20th century PM did more for the poor.
Perhaps the more intriguing thing now is what he does about non-dom status? He and we know the British public does not support this form of tax avoidance now it’s began to understand this. His family has benefitted from this status, We have a tax-take gap unless we are going to cut public services, and thus it seems an obvious ‘kill two birds with one stone’ option for him to show his fairness credentials. We’ll see perhaps in a couple of weeks the depth of integrity.
He doesn’t have non-dom status. His wife did, and was perfectly entitled to it under the law, so the point about tax avoidance is disingenuous. Do you have an ISA?
As I understand it, his wife has has renounced her non-dom status, following the standard BBC hatchet job on anyone in public life who has accumulated what they deem to be excess wealth. £30 coffee mugs, how dare they!
No matter that her father founded a business 40 years ago that has become the flagship for Indian entrepreneurial success and today provides well paid employment for hundreds of thousands of people.
In the “ACADEMY OF IDEAS”, the nature of #BritishPolyTRICKS* is the hubris of the Machiavellian argument as can be seen in this short dissertation: https://academyofideas.com/2019/08/machiavelli-the-rulers-vs-the-ruled-struggle-for-power/
#BritainIsFallen and #SheWillNotGetUp!!!
It’s not his money that worries me – money is just a number – no, it’s the power that he has. He is the most powerful person in the country, how can we trust him not to use that power to his own advantage? How could he possibly relate to the the average powerless Brit? We need someone with no power, who can therefore be trusted not to abuse it, and who understands what it is to be ineffectual: Bring back Liz Truss!
What ‘caste’ is Mr Sunak, does anyone know?
not the leounge, settee, toilet cruet poly nylon reound veowel seound caste…or the beard and white plimsoll, black 4×4 windowed , Courtenay and Tyger Jayde children caste, or the golf club heome ceounties caste…. that’ll do for me!
Let’s settle for the ICS ‘caste’.
Good.. so pleased that that wound at least 4 people up? hail the two legged clockwork mouse….