Sadly it makes sense to the polity who are struggling with their own domestic budgets. It doesn't make sense, of course, to the experts, but as that nice Mr Gove pointed out, we have no need of them and their high-falutin' ideas.
New KISS (keep it simple stupid) narrative needed. By way of a local example on a minuscule scale. Hammersmith Bridge repair to previous structure. Cost approx £200mn now probably closer to £300mn with big uncertainties so let’s make it £350. Minimum repair to make it able to accommodate lightweight public transport. Maybe this transport doesn’t exist but investment in getting it designed procured and installed say back of an envelope £50mn plus repair to lower standard another £50mn.
Getting the bridge operating as return to previous loading will require significant ongoing maintenance. The bridge will not have changed nor will means of crossing it. A simple cost benefit analysis either realistic figures will show why investment Is the best option. Do nothing means more disruption pain and benefits nobody. Plus any major repairs will disrupt use of the bridge and have big impact on local communities.
Three parties involved TfL/mayor, government and Hammersmith and Fulham council. Polity most directly affected is north Barnes in Richmond Council. Combined action may be possible with new government but it requires lead from the three main parties. Richmond will not swing across to Labour or tories as solid LD majority. Just needs some creative thinking and advocacy. Just …
I think the new Government is a credit to the U.K. political environment. Stability, stability, stability I say with the Stamer Conservative Government with ethics (sort of). 😭😆
Interesting. It used to be orthodox that there was a trade off between investment and current consumption. Now it seems to be orthodox that investment is paid for by debt. Another number is the balance of payment deficit. Can Britain's current account sustain current levels of consumption plus the additional strain that a big programme of investment would bring? We have sold UK assets abroad to sustain our current account deficits and now it appears the economy is substantially foreign owned, especially by the US. What does this mean for sovereignty? What does all this imply for interest rates?
I don't really know. But these are conversations we never seem to have.
The descent from Reeves’s disastrous July statement has been steady rather than precipitous. Is it too much now to describe this Government as friendless?
Amazing how all that Thatcherite shit has managed to become mainstream. Disaster!
Sadly it makes sense to the polity who are struggling with their own domestic budgets. It doesn't make sense, of course, to the experts, but as that nice Mr Gove pointed out, we have no need of them and their high-falutin' ideas.
New KISS (keep it simple stupid) narrative needed. By way of a local example on a minuscule scale. Hammersmith Bridge repair to previous structure. Cost approx £200mn now probably closer to £300mn with big uncertainties so let’s make it £350. Minimum repair to make it able to accommodate lightweight public transport. Maybe this transport doesn’t exist but investment in getting it designed procured and installed say back of an envelope £50mn plus repair to lower standard another £50mn.
Getting the bridge operating as return to previous loading will require significant ongoing maintenance. The bridge will not have changed nor will means of crossing it. A simple cost benefit analysis either realistic figures will show why investment Is the best option. Do nothing means more disruption pain and benefits nobody. Plus any major repairs will disrupt use of the bridge and have big impact on local communities.
Three parties involved TfL/mayor, government and Hammersmith and Fulham council. Polity most directly affected is north Barnes in Richmond Council. Combined action may be possible with new government but it requires lead from the three main parties. Richmond will not swing across to Labour or tories as solid LD majority. Just needs some creative thinking and advocacy. Just …
I think the new Government is a credit to the U.K. political environment. Stability, stability, stability I say with the Stamer Conservative Government with ethics (sort of). 😭😆
Interesting. It used to be orthodox that there was a trade off between investment and current consumption. Now it seems to be orthodox that investment is paid for by debt. Another number is the balance of payment deficit. Can Britain's current account sustain current levels of consumption plus the additional strain that a big programme of investment would bring? We have sold UK assets abroad to sustain our current account deficits and now it appears the economy is substantially foreign owned, especially by the US. What does this mean for sovereignty? What does all this imply for interest rates?
I don't really know. But these are conversations we never seem to have.
The descent from Reeves’s disastrous July statement has been steady rather than precipitous. Is it too much now to describe this Government as friendless?