Jack Kessler
LightNews LightNews
banner
jackkessler.bsky.social
Jack Kessler
@jackkessler.bsky.social
8.4K followers 1.9K following 2.6K posts
I write the newsletter, Lines To Take, bringing you one big story of the day, every day.

Sign up for free: https://www.linestotake.com/

I like human rights and French cuisine.
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
jackkessler.bsky.social
Jack Kessler @jackkessler.bsky.social · Mar 14
What it's like to go horribly, horribly viral.

That time I incurred the wrath of a continent (and the Daily Mail).

My new newsletter, Lines To Take, out now.
What it's like to go horribly, horribly viral
I incurred the wrath of a continent (and the Daily Mail)
www.linestotake.com
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
Fiscal Drag Race UK: Season 2028-29

With more than one million Britons paying the top rate of income tax, the professional classes have had to resort to Trader Joe's tote bags in their quest for exclusivity.

My newsletter, out now.
Rachel Reeves' Fiscal Drag Race
Frozen tax thresholds have turned one million Britons into top-rate taxpayers
www.linestotake.com
November 10, 2025 at 8:28 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
Fiscal Drag Race UK: Season 2028-29

With more than one million Britons paying the top rate of income tax, the professional classes have had to resort to Trader Joe's tote bags in their quest for exclusivity.

My newsletter, out now.
Rachel Reeves' Fiscal Drag Race
Frozen tax thresholds have turned one million Britons into top-rate taxpayers
www.linestotake.com
November 10, 2025 at 8:28 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
Pharmacist told me the symptoms are all in my head.
Gaslight pharmacy
November 8, 2025 at 2:09 PM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
What Nancy Pelosi understood about power.

(Hint: the purpose of winning elections is to pass laws.)

My newsletter, out now.
What Nancy Pelosi understood about power
The purpose of winning elections is to pass laws
www.linestotake.com
November 7, 2025 at 7:48 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
anandmenon.bsky.social
Obviously, it's up to the EU to decide who it wants to have access to its market and on what terms. But this suggests to me they're rowing back on commitments made in the Common Understanding agreed at the May summit 1/3 www.ft.com/content/8963...
EU demands UK pay into budget as part of relationship ‘reset’
Growing tension between London and Brussels just six months after summit set out to build stronger ties
www.ft.com
November 7, 2025 at 8:05 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
What Nancy Pelosi understood about power.

(Hint: the purpose of winning elections is to pass laws.)

My newsletter, out now.
What Nancy Pelosi understood about power
The purpose of winning elections is to pass laws
www.linestotake.com
November 7, 2025 at 7:48 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
During the Corbyn years, there was lots of "I can't believe the Blairites and Brownites fought when their ideological differences were nil!" and ok, sure, but also it was about positioning and personal ambition and that's way more normal than being led by someone far outside your political tradition
stephenkb.bsky.social Stephen Bush @stephenkb.bsky.social · 4d
“Don’t put up income tax, NI or VAT”…in the same interview “spend more money”. While I think the Labour leadership should have thought more intelligently (read: at all) about how to get out of their tax pledges, can see why they made them!
Labour should stick to manifesto pledges on tax, deputy leader says
The government has repeatedly refused to rule out increasing income tax in this month's Budget.
www.bbc.com
November 6, 2025 at 9:42 PM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
I wrote about muting certain words on Bluesky in an attempt to make the news feel more like an invited guest and less like one who barges in unannounced, demanding attention and a hot dinner.

✍️ www.linestotake.com/p/social-med...

My newsletter — out now.
It was only week three of lockdown when it stopped being amusing. Not the novelty of cancelled plans or the government-sanctioned daily walk, but the colleagues on Zoom who would begin speaking while still on mute. Invariably, the poor soul running the meeting would patiently interject, “Gareth, you’re on mute.” Worse, this always seemed to elicit widespread laughter, a display of collective madness eclipsed only by the performative clapping on BBC Question Time. Several years and doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines later, muting has become a vital tool in my social media arsenal. I don’t mean muting people — though I do that frequently — but certain words and phrases I’d rather not see. These can range from calls for the death of me and my family to TV shows that I simply find tedious. The aim is not to avoid the news entirely, be blind to painful topics or ignore all those with whom I disagree. Only to do these things on my terms. That is, when I’m in the right mental state. Put another way, I try to turn the news into an invited guest, not one who barges in unannounced, demanding attention and a hot dinner. Of course, there is no muted words function for the triggers that abound in the outside world, let alone the monologues in permanent dress-rehearsal mode in my head. But it can make social media — a place I have convinced myself I need to be in order to promote my work and generally get involved — just about bearable.
November 6, 2025 at 7:53 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
My favourite thing about road pricing is that we already do road pricing. It's called fuel duty and the more you drive, the more often you need to fill up.
November 6, 2025 at 1:49 PM
jackkessler.bsky.social
I wrote about muting certain words on Bluesky in an attempt to make the news feel more like an invited guest and less like one who barges in unannounced, demanding attention and a hot dinner.

✍️ www.linestotake.com/p/social-med...

My newsletter — out now.
It was only week three of lockdown when it stopped being amusing. Not the novelty of cancelled plans or the government-sanctioned daily walk, but the colleagues on Zoom who would begin speaking while still on mute. Invariably, the poor soul running the meeting would patiently interject, “Gareth, you’re on mute.” Worse, this always seemed to elicit widespread laughter, a display of collective madness eclipsed only by the performative clapping on BBC Question Time. Several years and doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines later, muting has become a vital tool in my social media arsenal. I don’t mean muting people — though I do that frequently — but certain words and phrases I’d rather not see. These can range from calls for the death of me and my family to TV shows that I simply find tedious. The aim is not to avoid the news entirely, be blind to painful topics or ignore all those with whom I disagree. Only to do these things on my terms. That is, when I’m in the right mental state. Put another way, I try to turn the news into an invited guest, not one who barges in unannounced, demanding attention and a hot dinner. Of course, there is no muted words function for the triggers that abound in the outside world, let alone the monologues in permanent dress-rehearsal mode in my head. But it can make social media — a place I have convinced myself I need to be in order to promote my work and generally get involved — just about bearable.
November 6, 2025 at 7:53 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
Breaking manifesto promises is bad. But I’m not convinced getting to 2029 saying "yes public services are still on their knees but at least we didn’t raise the basic rate of income tax" is a winning strategy either.
That was a really weird speech by Rachel Reeves. All chancellors engage in a bit of pitch-rolling prior to any fiscal event. But they don’t call what felt a lot like an emergency news conference in which they set out all the problems the economy faces. In an ideal world, chancellors wouldn’t do any media at all, given that every question is greeted with the same rote response: “You’ll have to wait for the Budget”. But Reeves clearly felt like she had no choice. Because she is about to perform a U-turn on a par with Ted Heath in 1972 and François Mitterrand in 1983. All governments perform U-turns and while they make headlines, they are not usually a big deal. Turning around, no matter how inelegantly, is almost always preferable to pressing ahead in the wrong direction. But this isn’t retreating on minimum alcohol pricing! The government will no doubt pay a political price for breaking its headline manifesto commitment. It deserves to. But I’m not sure getting to 2029 with NHS waiting lists still rising, prisoners still being let out early and local government on its knees but at least we didn’t raise the basic rate of income tax will be a winning strategy either. The mistake is in the timing. Reeves says that tax rises are a necessary response to “the world as it is”, given that the alternative would be cuts (unpalatable) or more borrowing (unfeasible). The problem is, the world has not actually changed that much in the last 12 months. Donald Trump was a long-time favourite to win back the White House. All that has happened is that Labour has waited more than a year to make the difficult choices it had claimed were not necessary.
November 5, 2025 at 10:45 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
Read my lips: no good options.

Labour will pay a price for breaking its tax promises — it deserves to. But short of a time machine, what's the alternative?

My newsletter, out now.
Read my lips: no good options
Labour will pay a price for breaking its tax promises — it deserves to. But what's the alternative?
www.linestotake.com
November 5, 2025 at 7:45 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
Breaking manifesto promises is bad. But I’m not convinced getting to 2029 saying "yes public services are still on their knees but at least we didn’t raise the basic rate of income tax" is a winning strategy either.
That was a really weird speech by Rachel Reeves. All chancellors engage in a bit of pitch-rolling prior to any fiscal event. But they don’t call what felt a lot like an emergency news conference in which they set out all the problems the economy faces. In an ideal world, chancellors wouldn’t do any media at all, given that every question is greeted with the same rote response: “You’ll have to wait for the Budget”. But Reeves clearly felt like she had no choice. Because she is about to perform a U-turn on a par with Ted Heath in 1972 and François Mitterrand in 1983. All governments perform U-turns and while they make headlines, they are not usually a big deal. Turning around, no matter how inelegantly, is almost always preferable to pressing ahead in the wrong direction. But this isn’t retreating on minimum alcohol pricing! The government will no doubt pay a political price for breaking its headline manifesto commitment. It deserves to. But I’m not sure getting to 2029 with NHS waiting lists still rising, prisoners still being let out early and local government on its knees but at least we didn’t raise the basic rate of income tax will be a winning strategy either. The mistake is in the timing. Reeves says that tax rises are a necessary response to “the world as it is”, given that the alternative would be cuts (unpalatable) or more borrowing (unfeasible). The problem is, the world has not actually changed that much in the last 12 months. Donald Trump was a long-time favourite to win back the White House. All that has happened is that Labour has waited more than a year to make the difficult choices it had claimed were not necessary.
November 5, 2025 at 10:45 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
I was always on Basil's side (context: I consider King Lear to be the most sympathetic character in Shakespeare). Nevertheless, loved this from @theguyliner.bsky.social.
The truth about Sybil
Basil didn't deserve her.
theguyliner.substack.com
November 5, 2025 at 9:46 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
*Me when I deposit some money into my NS&I*
Bond markets are winning the Budget stand-off
Gilts investors have long suspected that Labour would abandon its manifesto promises
www.ft.com
November 5, 2025 at 9:20 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
Read my lips: no good options.

Labour will pay a price for breaking its tax promises — it deserves to. But short of a time machine, what's the alternative?

My newsletter, out now.
Read my lips: no good options
Labour will pay a price for breaking its tax promises — it deserves to. But what's the alternative?
www.linestotake.com
November 5, 2025 at 7:45 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
What if Jeremy Hunt* actually had to deliver on his pre-election spending plans?

*Out of an abundance of caution, my lawyers have advised me to state I am in no way accusing him of murder.

✍️ www.linestotake.com/p/budget-tax...

My newsletter, out now.
One of the stranger publishing events this century appeared in the form of OJ Simpson’s 2007 book, originally titled ‘If I Did It’. The book offered a hypothetical account of how Simpson would have murdered his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman, had he in fact been the real killer. Intense public criticism led to the cancellation of the book’s publication. It was later released by the Goldman family under a new title, If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer, in part to satisfy the civil judgement against Simpson, where it went on to become a New York Times bestseller. Which is just about the most American thing I have ever heard. In a sense — though I accept this may be only in my head — the book has something in common with Jeremy Hunt’s last Budget. Because while Hunt has never been accused of murder, he does share culpability for the UK’s present fiscal bind. Not only as a result of his reckless cuts to national insurance, but also thanks to the spending plans they relied on, which were so implausibly tight as to verge on science fiction. Of course, following the Tories’ defeat at the election, Hunt never had to deliver them. But a report by Policy Exchange, the centre-right think tank, does a neat job of detailing what cuts he might have made if he were serious about sticking to his plans. To make the numbers sort of add up, Hunt had pencilled in real-terms cuts to investment spending of £18bn a year by 2030. Meanwhile, the March 2024 Budget assumed day-to-day spending would rise by only 1% a year above inflation, leaving unprotected departments facing cuts of up to £20bn a year. Good luck with that.
November 4, 2025 at 8:07 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
What if Jeremy Hunt* actually had to deliver on his pre-election spending plans?

*Out of an abundance of caution, my lawyers have advised me to state I am in no way accusing him of murder.

✍️ www.linestotake.com/p/budget-tax...

My newsletter, out now.
One of the stranger publishing events this century appeared in the form of OJ Simpson’s 2007 book, originally titled ‘If I Did It’. The book offered a hypothetical account of how Simpson would have murdered his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman, had he in fact been the real killer. Intense public criticism led to the cancellation of the book’s publication. It was later released by the Goldman family under a new title, If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer, in part to satisfy the civil judgement against Simpson, where it went on to become a New York Times bestseller. Which is just about the most American thing I have ever heard. In a sense — though I accept this may be only in my head — the book has something in common with Jeremy Hunt’s last Budget. Because while Hunt has never been accused of murder, he does share culpability for the UK’s present fiscal bind. Not only as a result of his reckless cuts to national insurance, but also thanks to the spending plans they relied on, which were so implausibly tight as to verge on science fiction. Of course, following the Tories’ defeat at the election, Hunt never had to deliver them. But a report by Policy Exchange, the centre-right think tank, does a neat job of detailing what cuts he might have made if he were serious about sticking to his plans. To make the numbers sort of add up, Hunt had pencilled in real-terms cuts to investment spending of £18bn a year by 2030. Meanwhile, the March 2024 Budget assumed day-to-day spending would rise by only 1% a year above inflation, leaving unprotected departments facing cuts of up to £20bn a year. Good luck with that.
November 4, 2025 at 8:07 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
In defence of the old boys (and girls) network.

The UK political class is famously narrow. Everyone knows everyone, often since university. This has its flaws, but also creates the kind of guardrails no law or constitution can provide.

✍️ www.linestotake.com/p/spectator-...

My newsletter, out now.
The UK is not a large country and the pool from which its political class has historically been drawn is even smaller. No fewer than 20 of 58 prime ministers were educated at Eton College, while 45 attended either Oxford or Cambridge universities. In short, everyone knows everyone, and have often done so since they were either in short trousers or long gowns. Such a system has its flaws, of course. The prototypical example is hereditary monarchy. Families may be blessed with one or two wise heirs. But eventually, the bloke sitting on the throne is going to be a total duffer, and the entire operation — perhaps even empire — collapses in a heap. Nevertheless, there are clear advantages to keeping small. In nature, that might be agility, in business clarity of purpose and on aeroplanes more legroom. In politics, it is the ability to put a human face on a rival. It is simply much harder to condemn your opponents as evil if you have seen them vomiting up some greenish-blue concoction following a particularly grizzly game of Ring of Fire. It is all too easy to dehumanise our opponents. To rationalise hatred, dismiss their ambitions or fears, even to justify violence against them. In fact, we see it all the time. Stupid, fun and slightly smug events such as awards ceremonies can’t prevent that by themselves. Nor is the narrowness of our political talent pool an unalloyed good. But a slightly drunken toast and a shared laugh across party lines — these are the guardrails that no law or constitution can provide.
November 3, 2025 at 9:26 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
In defence of the old boys (and girls) network.

The UK political class is famously narrow. Everyone knows everyone, often since university. This has its flaws, but also creates the kind of guardrails no law or constitution can provide.

✍️ www.linestotake.com/p/spectator-...

My newsletter, out now.
The UK is not a large country and the pool from which its political class has historically been drawn is even smaller. No fewer than 20 of 58 prime ministers were educated at Eton College, while 45 attended either Oxford or Cambridge universities. In short, everyone knows everyone, and have often done so since they were either in short trousers or long gowns. Such a system has its flaws, of course. The prototypical example is hereditary monarchy. Families may be blessed with one or two wise heirs. But eventually, the bloke sitting on the throne is going to be a total duffer, and the entire operation — perhaps even empire — collapses in a heap. Nevertheless, there are clear advantages to keeping small. In nature, that might be agility, in business clarity of purpose and on aeroplanes more legroom. In politics, it is the ability to put a human face on a rival. It is simply much harder to condemn your opponents as evil if you have seen them vomiting up some greenish-blue concoction following a particularly grizzly game of Ring of Fire. It is all too easy to dehumanise our opponents. To rationalise hatred, dismiss their ambitions or fears, even to justify violence against them. In fact, we see it all the time. Stupid, fun and slightly smug events such as awards ceremonies can’t prevent that by themselves. Nor is the narrowness of our political talent pool an unalloyed good. But a slightly drunken toast and a shared laugh across party lines — these are the guardrails that no law or constitution can provide.
November 3, 2025 at 9:26 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
aphclarkson.bsky.social
Memory of the Second World War and genocidal Nazi crimes is now as distant to Zoomers as memory of trenches at the Somme and Verdun was to my Xennial generation born in the late 1970s and 1980s.

The battle against myths of Nazism can no longer rely on lived experience of its catastrophic realities
sitkaworldsfair.bsky.social Justin @sitkaworldsfair.bsky.social · 10d
Evidently there was an Auschwitz-themed float in a Halloween parade in Pennsylvania.

The float was for a Catholic school, and to their credit the church immediately disavowed it.

Thing is, I don’t think high school kids did this entirely on their own. I’m guessing parents had to be involved.
A Halloween parade float with the gates of Auschwitz
November 1, 2025 at 12:09 PM
jackkessler.bsky.social
Does anyone get random names stuck in their heads and only days later it turns out they’re podcast producers who get a shoutout at the end of episodes?
November 2, 2025 at 8:03 AM
jackkessler.bsky.social
Sad to see such a bad take from Stephen. Notwithstanding the scramble for overhead bin space, there's the joy of settling in, gazing out of a smaller, different window, perusing the buy onboard options. The gate area is an interstitial void — no one should choose to dwell there!
stephenkb.bsky.social Stephen Bush @stephenkb.bsky.social · 10d
Genuinely the greatest trick the aviation industry has ever pulled to convince people that “sitting on a stationary plane for longer” is something worth paying for.
November 1, 2025 at 8:16 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
jackkessler.bsky.social
I know I live chronically in the late '90s, but the Peter Mandelson/Geoffrey Robinson private loan affair is genuinely wild.

Reeves' little licensing snafu as good a reason as any to dive into the archives.

My newsletter, out now.
Reeves' housing affair has nothing on Mandelson
Starmer’s cabinet scandals fail to match New Labour for sheer spectacle
www.linestotake.com
October 31, 2025 at 7:44 AM
Reposted by Jack Kessler
anandmenon.bsky.social
I'd never really thought explicitly about writing, how I do it, and why I do it, til this conversation with @catherinedevries.bsky.social Who makes it sound like I've thought it all through much better than I have... catherineeunicedevries.substack.com/p/etched-in-...
Etched in Marble: Anand Menon on Clear Thinking, Public Writing, and the Joy of Being Useful
Writers on the Forces That Shape Us and the Writing That Endures
catherineeunicedevries.substack.com
October 31, 2025 at 8:52 AM