John Chambers
@johnchambers99.bsky.social
This is where I have to describe myself in a wry, self deprecating, and concise manner.
And fail.
And fail.
I do wonder sometimes…
May 26, 2025 at 10:00 AM
I do wonder sometimes…
So, not really a Roman structure? That destroys its claim to be second oldest church in UK.
March 30, 2025 at 9:45 PM
So, not really a Roman structure? That destroys its claim to be second oldest church in UK.
I thought it was the remains of a gatehouse…?
March 30, 2025 at 9:38 PM
I thought it was the remains of a gatehouse…?
Furthermore, when it comes to ‘hard choices need to be made’…
UK has many of the tax havens as UK overseas territories. Tax loopholes for the super wealthy.
Will they be a hard choice?
UK has many of the tax havens as UK overseas territories. Tax loopholes for the super wealthy.
Will they be a hard choice?
March 15, 2025 at 8:59 AM
Furthermore, when it comes to ‘hard choices need to be made’…
UK has many of the tax havens as UK overseas territories. Tax loopholes for the super wealthy.
Will they be a hard choice?
UK has many of the tax havens as UK overseas territories. Tax loopholes for the super wealthy.
Will they be a hard choice?
Council housing: don’t need it. Water: fine as a private industry. Buses: let the market decide.
But for Starmer to do such a big U turn…..
Democracy is dead. The will of the majority doesn’t matter.
The greed of the few trumps the good of the many.
But for Starmer to do such a big U turn…..
Democracy is dead. The will of the majority doesn’t matter.
The greed of the few trumps the good of the many.
March 15, 2025 at 8:11 AM
Council housing: don’t need it. Water: fine as a private industry. Buses: let the market decide.
But for Starmer to do such a big U turn…..
Democracy is dead. The will of the majority doesn’t matter.
The greed of the few trumps the good of the many.
But for Starmer to do such a big U turn…..
Democracy is dead. The will of the majority doesn’t matter.
The greed of the few trumps the good of the many.
The bit which dismays me the most is that we’re still under Thatcherism. And I hated that woman.
Trickle down economics, as you say, has been shown not to work. Let the rich get richer stops right there. No trickle.
I was dismayed at Blair leaving her legacy intact.
Trickle down economics, as you say, has been shown not to work. Let the rich get richer stops right there. No trickle.
I was dismayed at Blair leaving her legacy intact.
March 15, 2025 at 8:06 AM
The bit which dismays me the most is that we’re still under Thatcherism. And I hated that woman.
Trickle down economics, as you say, has been shown not to work. Let the rich get richer stops right there. No trickle.
I was dismayed at Blair leaving her legacy intact.
Trickle down economics, as you say, has been shown not to work. Let the rich get richer stops right there. No trickle.
I was dismayed at Blair leaving her legacy intact.
@garyseconomics.bsky.social has been a real eye opener as to how the super wealthy dodge tax.
There is the money available to run the state properly; it just needs a govt with conviction and the kahunas (?) to do it.
There is the money available to run the state properly; it just needs a govt with conviction and the kahunas (?) to do it.
March 14, 2025 at 4:25 PM
@garyseconomics.bsky.social has been a real eye opener as to how the super wealthy dodge tax.
There is the money available to run the state properly; it just needs a govt with conviction and the kahunas (?) to do it.
There is the money available to run the state properly; it just needs a govt with conviction and the kahunas (?) to do it.
Not only is it inherently wrong, and a bad thing to do morally, it is also very bad economics.
To get the economy going, people need to be spending. Further squeezing people is counterproductive.
There are options. Tax relief on higher rate tax payers for extra pensions costs the treasury £24bn.
To get the economy going, people need to be spending. Further squeezing people is counterproductive.
There are options. Tax relief on higher rate tax payers for extra pensions costs the treasury £24bn.
March 14, 2025 at 4:22 PM
Not only is it inherently wrong, and a bad thing to do morally, it is also very bad economics.
To get the economy going, people need to be spending. Further squeezing people is counterproductive.
There are options. Tax relief on higher rate tax payers for extra pensions costs the treasury £24bn.
To get the economy going, people need to be spending. Further squeezing people is counterproductive.
There are options. Tax relief on higher rate tax payers for extra pensions costs the treasury £24bn.
Nearly identical. Except he has all black top whiskers by his left eye.
March 3, 2025 at 9:36 AM
Nearly identical. Except he has all black top whiskers by his left eye.
It does make you wonder exactly what is going on…
February 26, 2025 at 5:50 PM
It does make you wonder exactly what is going on…
Absolutely. Some retard in Labour policy HQ, completely out of touch with reality, has assumed that it was a resounding endorsement.
Shows how politically naive they are.
And that assumption will come back to bite them.
Shows how politically naive they are.
And that assumption will come back to bite them.
February 25, 2025 at 9:16 PM
Absolutely. Some retard in Labour policy HQ, completely out of touch with reality, has assumed that it was a resounding endorsement.
Shows how politically naive they are.
And that assumption will come back to bite them.
Shows how politically naive they are.
And that assumption will come back to bite them.
Absolutely. Reverse the unaffordable Tory tax cuts for a start.
February 25, 2025 at 6:33 PM
Absolutely. Reverse the unaffordable Tory tax cuts for a start.
Why is Starmer so adamant?
February 25, 2025 at 6:32 PM
Why is Starmer so adamant?
I’d say leadership aren’t listening.
February 9, 2025 at 8:48 PM
I’d say leadership aren’t listening.
Completely agree: it was a huge anti Tory vote plus many trad Tories staying at home.
I was referring to the overall stance of the Labour Party traditionally: it’s an internationalist movement, not a little England one.
Some notable exceptions, like Tony Benn.
I was referring to the overall stance of the Labour Party traditionally: it’s an internationalist movement, not a little England one.
Some notable exceptions, like Tony Benn.
February 2, 2025 at 3:33 PM
Completely agree: it was a huge anti Tory vote plus many trad Tories staying at home.
I was referring to the overall stance of the Labour Party traditionally: it’s an internationalist movement, not a little England one.
Some notable exceptions, like Tony Benn.
I was referring to the overall stance of the Labour Party traditionally: it’s an internationalist movement, not a little England one.
Some notable exceptions, like Tony Benn.
I’m pretty sure that if a referendum 2 was held now, the rejoin vote would have a substantial majority.
People have seen the lies.
People have seen the lies.
February 2, 2025 at 2:43 PM
I’m pretty sure that if a referendum 2 was held now, the rejoin vote would have a substantial majority.
People have seen the lies.
People have seen the lies.
Full rejoin is a bit of a stretch initially, but the case for SM or CU is very strong, and increasingly popular.
This govt needs to work out what it stands for, and why it was elected. To help the billionaire class, or ordinary people.
And then fight for what it believes.
This govt needs to work out what it stands for, and why it was elected. To help the billionaire class, or ordinary people.
And then fight for what it believes.
February 2, 2025 at 2:42 PM
Full rejoin is a bit of a stretch initially, but the case for SM or CU is very strong, and increasingly popular.
This govt needs to work out what it stands for, and why it was elected. To help the billionaire class, or ordinary people.
And then fight for what it believes.
This govt needs to work out what it stands for, and why it was elected. To help the billionaire class, or ordinary people.
And then fight for what it believes.
Absolutely. I thought I’d voted for change.
They seem intent on alienating their support, and trying to please the Daily Mail.
This isn’t what people voted for.
They seem intent on alienating their support, and trying to please the Daily Mail.
This isn’t what people voted for.
February 2, 2025 at 12:22 PM
Absolutely. I thought I’d voted for change.
They seem intent on alienating their support, and trying to please the Daily Mail.
This isn’t what people voted for.
They seem intent on alienating their support, and trying to please the Daily Mail.
This isn’t what people voted for.
Is it Labour, or Starmer? I’d always thought the party was vaguely pro-EU.
Why is he wasting political capital and goodwill on such a senseless stand?
Why is he wasting political capital and goodwill on such a senseless stand?
February 2, 2025 at 10:48 AM
Is it Labour, or Starmer? I’d always thought the party was vaguely pro-EU.
Why is he wasting political capital and goodwill on such a senseless stand?
Why is he wasting political capital and goodwill on such a senseless stand?
Well…….
Makes you wonder.
Makes you wonder.
February 2, 2025 at 10:21 AM
Well…….
Makes you wonder.
Makes you wonder.
I just don’t know what they’re playing at any longer…
I thought I’d voted for change.
I thought I’d voted for change.
February 2, 2025 at 10:17 AM
I just don’t know what they’re playing at any longer…
I thought I’d voted for change.
I thought I’d voted for change.