When hard work is just not good enough

My fellow blogger Nick Drew made an interesting comment on the last post:


"Corbyn is workshy Bastard"


This is self-evidently true unless you count going on marches, making jam and winging-it making conspiracy theory demagoguery as work.


However, I have reflected on to consider where this is in fact a good trait? Because it's Friday so not entirely seriously, I thought about the records of some of the recent leaders in the UK and US, so as to compare what a lazy Corbyn PM may become:


May/Brown - by common acclaim these are the worst Prime Ministers of recent times. Both very hard working, both serious and somewhat pious in nature, both well-meaning but also, delusional. No good has come of their hard work, the more they did the more of a mess they made and boy, was it a mess. May at least inherited a very tricky situation whereas Brown hubristically was the author of his own from the time of his Chancellorship. The country has had a hard time under such leadership and growth has been weak.

Blair/Cameron - Both men easy in front of the cameras, happy to do some virtue signalling and occasionally given the putting in some work - but equally dependent on a cabal of hard working supporters to put in the hard yards. Both retired, Blair to become leader of the global lizard underground and Cameron to a quiet life with him and his money. Both made a decent impression, did some good things and in Blair's case some terrible things when he wrongly sought to try at something. The Country broadly did OK under both of them (Blair ended with the GFC of course, so was something of a chimera created by Brown) and us plebs rolled along OK


Major - Did naff all, had no power, sat around a lot post Black-Wednesday with not much going on. Huge defeat by Blair, contributed much merriment to the nation with the whole back to basics farrago which consumed time but no effort. The country boomed, jobs for all, growing tax take, the mid to late nineties after the 1990 recession was a happy time!


Then we can look to America too  -


Reagan, lazy and latterly sadly, demented. By all accounts properly could not be arsed with much at all apart from daytime TV. Fantastic President, economy soared, smashed the USSR by teatime.

Clinton , busy with Ugandan affairs and defending silly mud-slinging over whitewater and trying to avoid his wife at all times. US did brilliantly, economy grew and everyone now looks to him as being one of the best ever. He literally did nothing.


Obama, hard working, interfering, well-meaning and useless. Tough times in America and the worst foreign policy for decades and decades. Worked very hard and bequeathed the US Donald Trump.




All the hard workers have huffed and puffed to achieve nothing. Constantly screwing with the systems of Government at home and overseas suffers from a very strong and direct law of diminishing returns. Indeed, the least engaged have often done the best. I can see Thatcher as different exception but she was indeed the exception to prove the rule whose like we shall not see again.


We as voters should therefore be wiser in future, hard working politicians should not be voted for, they merely cause more trouble than existed before.


In conclusion then a lazy Corbyn might be good as despite his demented socialist dreams he wont actually get around to any of it. I do worry his fellow-travellers might jump in to exploit this, but we will have to see. Then if the choice is between Bojo and Farage as alternatives then all well and good, as they similarly won't be that bothered with really doing much, whatever sound and fury emanates forth.


Finally then, soon we may get a choice of three politicians who don't want to actually do much,  at last allowing the Country to descend into a period of relative political peace and economic stability.

Silly season in full swing

So this week, in review....


Labour - WE ARE NOT ANTI-SEMITES, we just like to reserve the right to call Israeli's Nazi's and make comparisons to the Holocaust every now and again. Really, what's the harm in that?


Boris - Hold my Beer


Boris - I defend the right of muslim women to dress like letterboxes, even though this is a bit of a dog-whistle because its boring on the back benches. Bit of japes, sure nothing will come of it.


Labour - Quick, call all Tories Islamaphobes, maybe people will finally forget about our anti-Semitism! (Handily, this doubles down on our identity politics voter segregation - hooray!)


Theresa May - Fuck I hate Boris, quick, pile in an call him an Islamaphobe, link it to Hard Brexit, conduct an investigation, remind everyone how all leavers are racist.




So the theme for this year's silly season is the competitive identity politics Olympics. Pick on some groups, laud others, accuse everyone else of being discriminatory whilst sitting on your own moral mound surrounded by fawning acolytes. When in fact as shown this week, there is zero morality involved and the entire confecture is created for personal mud-slinging. The lowest of low politics


Don't know about the readership, but this is a truly terrible look. I can't see how a move to pure focus on identity politics can be good for the Western Democracies in the long-term....


After all this is what Hitler did....oh, bugger.....

Political World Cup of Brexit

And we are off in the Political World Cup of Brexit - there are many contenders and for this extra special edition there we have even allowed some Jonnie Foreigner entrants to make it feel like a true world event rather than those saddo US attempts:


So, who will lift the Brexit World Cup, delivering peace, harmony and all things nice to the People of Britain, the UK and the World in 2018?


Here are the runners and riders:


2-1 Barnier, M - Knows how to play the game better than any other participant, can utilise huge numbers of subsitutes and has unquestioning backing across the continent, dangerous opponent.


3-1 - May, T - Early Favourite, since appointment as team Captain asfter playing a lacklustre role on the losing side of the last World Remain Cup, she holds some of the cards. However, having no idea what to do with them the 764 round event may prove to complex for her.


5-1 Jonson, B - Captain of the last winning team, but stuck out on the Wing this time. Has the right ideas and support but lacks good finishing.


7-1 Corbyn, J - Newcomer, seems to struggle to understand rules and of limited mental game, popular and has lots of political stamina, may even win by default if other challenger fall away.


13/2 Putin, V - Dark horse, rumoured to have plenty of secret tactics and can play very dirty when required, lack of popularity may count against.


8-1 Junker, J - Struggles to make sense of things, attempts many two-footed tackles, renowned as a tough campaigner but very likely to get a red  (wine) card at the crucial moment.


12-1 - Farage, N- Cantered to the win last time out, now injured and withdrawn, considering a late entry but don't bet on it. An entry would push him to clear favourite status though.


14-1 Gove, M - Forgotten man since the last event, capable player in every position, lacks charisma and a team around him.


15-1 Merkel, A - Could be favourite due to immense strength and experience, now somewhat tired, however and a very unhappy team behind her, unlikely to last the distance.




More tips in the comments please....

Interesting things to do this weekend

Not sure what to do with yourself, there is a plethora of things to do..which do you prefer?




1. Watch a Wedding on the Telly


2. Watch a football match on the Telly


3. Read The Observer cover to cover


4. Go on a rally to protest over Hamas/IDF somewhere in London


5. Mend the Garden fence


Or something else entirely....

Uherd - will this work?

Enough of meaty topics this week!


Since I started blogging, I have always had time for Tim Montgomerie - perhaps this is related to him making time for me!


His new news venture is an interesting one, having left The Times. He intends to have a long-piece magazine-style website, not focusing on short-term themes. He certainly has lined up an, err, interesting mix of writers contributing.


The first topic, of the influence of rolling news and social media is an interesting one - if a little rhetorical - of course rolling news and social media are affecting the government - we can all see Jeremy Corbyn FFS!.


Perhaps some light will be drawn as to what exactly we are supposed to do about this, but I am less convinced when you get Alistair Campbell, the arch-creator of this mess, to opine from afar.


However, does the world need another alternative to the Spectator - indeed, can something like this work? I kind of hope so, because with news commentary declining in relevance and readership I do see around me that people are becoming less informed about the facts of the world than we previously the case.


Am I right to think that or just getting old?

Normal Service may be resumed shortly...

Not content with ruining the Middle East, Mr Blair comes home....

This time, its revolution on the UK on the menu.


Lovely man, oh how we missed him!

Even The Treasury is Fallible

So there we are, diligently reading the Boy Genius' George's latest masterwork Fixing The Foundations, a.k.a. the Treasury's "Productivity Plan".   Turning to the energy section - "The government aims to improve productivity in energy generation, production, supply and usage.  This will be achieved through ..."  -  we find the inevitable nuclear daydream, as follows:

... delivering a significant expansion in new nuclear power in the UK. The Hinkley Point C power station alone could generate 7% of the UK’s electricity needs 1

Well it could, but that's a rather pointed conditional.  And what's that little '1', the footnote at the end?  The eye falls to the bottom of the page where we read, in 6-point: 

1 Job stats from EDF

But job stats are there none!  Now we know the government and EDF are bosom buddies - how else to explain, well, anything UK-nuclear really - but what happened when someone at the Treasury was set on to ring up the froggies and ask them how many jobs Hinkley Point will create?  Did they just forget?  Surely not, at the Treasury!

Or did EDF say: not a single bloody job until you roll over on all our remaining demands and sign the bloody contract !  (Oh, and even then, the lion's share will be going to French firms.)

All entirely academic, 'cos it ain't gonna happen.

ND

CIA step in to Question Time row

Nigel Farage seen leaving Canterbury last night

The former Director of the CIA has today stepped into the row over last night's BBC Question Time edition.

Speaking on behalf of frightened of BBC, (£330,000 a-year) Executives, the Director denied that hosting Russell Brand on the show was cruel and unusual punishment.

Brand, a mentally distuberd if brilliant, counter-terrorist, launched into a wave of sexist attacks on a British Minister - "Pay their pensions then, love. Excuse the sexist language, I'm working on it."

In addition he lambasted UKIP leader Nigel Farage. In what was a clear set-up the BBC allowed a left wing heckler to constantly shout 'Racist' at Nigel Farage at regular intervals.

The CIA director insisted that this kind of mental testing was important for the BBC if it was to be able to expose what it really thought about the true inner beliefs of the panellists exposed to this type of interrogation.

Furthermore, the CIA insist that Ed Milliband and David Cameron had both signed up to the agenda. along with the Guardian Media group and that bloke who is a judge and wants to stand for Labour now.

The BBC will not be making any more Question Time series until the New Year, when there are plans afoot to hold the show at GCHQ and aboard HMS Victory

Dark Side of the Moon

Watching the news with Quango Jnr, who is almost six years old, we saw the craft land on the comet. 
This prompted him to seek out his Transformers 3:Dark Side of the Moon, DVD.

The premise of the film is that the space race of the 1960s was even more dramatic as the early Soviet and American lunar probes and unmanned landers had discovered a crashed, wrecked space craft on the far side of the moon and wanted that alien technology.

The film has the astronauts using the brief time window when earth cannot receive transmissions to go and investigate the alien crash site..where they discover the Transformers.

There is a mix of real footage and recreation and CGI that give an authentic look to  these scenes.

I explained a bit to junior Quango, in that knowledgeable dad fashion, about the 'low gravity' bouncy movement.The gold visor covers and the dark and light sides of the moon. And I told him that when I was about his age I had watched, on TV,  those actual astronauts land on the moon. And how this was a really big deal as no-one had ever gone and had a look to see what was on the moon before.

"So..you saw the real spacemen?"

"Yep!"

"You saw the spacemen jump onto the moon?"

"Yes, I did."

"Wow! And did they have the American flag?"

"They did..I saw the flag"

"And you saw the Transformers?"

"..erm...well...erm...no..But I did see the spacemen take some photographs with special..er.. space cameras.."

"Photos of the Transformers?"

"..er..well...no...they..ermm.,.they didn't really show you the Transformers."

There was a six year old's thoughtful silence..
Then he looked at me,  patted my arm and said ..

"Try not to be too disappointed, dad."

Top 5 most annoying corporate buzzwords of the moment

This week has seen a huge media interest in the potential takeover of Astrazeneca by Pfizer which has involved many non-financial media commentators having their say, even worse, serial linguistic offenders such as Chuka Umana have been getting on the airwaves non-stop.

For the most part the gibberish they speak is muzak at best. Few seem to understand the basics of say the Enterprise Act or European law on take-overs - but hey, only losers loves detail.

However, key buzzwords really get my goat and given it is Friday here is this week's list of contenders of current buzzwords in the corporate world:

1. Public Interest - who is this public? why are they interested? the public is not an amorphous mass with a single hive-mind. When anyone ever says 'the Public Interest' they ALWAYS actually mean my job and my voter base. As ever, the total opposite of the true meaning.

2. Simplification - This is how Antony Jenkin's described 19,000 job cuts at Barclays. It is even more opaque than downsizing or right-sizing which are it 2008 vintage predecessors. Simplification sounds like a good idea, but stopping dong things that lose you money is not simplification is it?

3. Transformational Change - Also on the job cuts theme..what is this, change is means to transform things. Transformation means to change things, so better would be transformational or change, but not both, or perhaps the next step is transformational transformation?

4. Social Business - Really, as if we had not had enough of social media, now comes Social Business - what it really means is digital communication, but hey that does not sound cool or lefty enough.

5. Competency Framework - Or, um, skills as they used to be known. Skills you need to do your job, perhaps even or tasks you need to be able to complete effectiely. It's not hard, there is no need for a framework and competency is used in the negative meaning solely - i.e. it measures what you can't do. HR people have a lot to answer for as I could get acres from the garbage they make up to help bolster their numbers.

There must be many more - welcome them in the comments....

The Dichotomy of Modern Politics...

Seeing the reaction of the Left to the Coalition Budget review this week has prompted me to review how Opposition/Government politics is led by populist value-free statements in the absence of any real policy differences, thus:

When you take the Government takes a long time to decide, it's slow.

When Ed Miliband takes a long time, he's thorough.

When the Government won't do it, it's lazy and cold-hearted.

When Labour won't do it, they're caring of the poor.

When The Government make a mistake, they're incompetent idiots 

When Ed Balls makes a mistake at the red lights, he's only human.

When Government acts without mass consultation, it's overstepping its authority.

When your Labour do the same thing, that's initiative.

When The Government holds its position, they are being pig-headed.

When your Ed Milliband does it, he's being firm.

 

When they pass legislation that is popular, the Government is giving into base demagoguery.

When your Labour pleases the Unions, they being co-operative.

When Ministers out of the office, they are shirking at burger joints.

When your Ed Milliband is out of the office, he's on business.

When David Cameron takes a break, he's a lazy slacker.

When your Ed Milliband has a holiday, it's because he's overworked.

The French twist on fairness

Can tax rates at 75% work?

They have been announced after being long trailed as France tries to get it budget deficit in order. Interesting that France is of course running a deficit only half of the UK's; however, starting with a high debt level means that in many ways our positions are fairly similar at a macro level.

75% tax on earnings over a million euro's is not going to lose you many votes, I guess that is the calculation. As in the UK, if it was applied to salaries of over £750,000 then hardly anyone would be hit. Very few work for PAYE wages at this level - oddly, mainly professionals I would imagine like top doctors and lawyers. Most owners at this level would pay themselves dividends in any event in the UK and so avoid that tax in any event. Private Equity earners and Hedge Funds who mind have all legged it to Switzerland already.

Which leads me to wondering why 75%, its such an arbitrary number, why not 100%? If you are going to go down a socialist road like this the 100% income tax level makes a lot more sense, especially at the incredible sum of 1 million euro's a year income and above. Certainly key socialist goals such as levelling societal incomes would be greatly enhanced if you enforced a single, 100% tax on all income over such a level. After all, 75% leaves you with not much anyway given there are sundry taxes to pay as well as this. 100% would be in many ways fairer to society.

And if you were really a serious socialist, you would also impose 100% death duties on all but the family home. That way you could ensure that there was no inter-generational advantages generated, people would spend all their money and so boost the current economy. This would boost fairness measurebaly in society.

Mr Milliband has said how much he admires Francois Hollande - I hope to see some of these ideas in his conference speech.