The new Government jet may struggle to land in fog and bad weather because it was ordered without a navigational system which is made by an Israeli company, The Journal has learned.
https://t.co/Sq2fTT9VAi
🚨 NEW: Jeremy Clarkson says benefits claimants should be forced to write a genuine thank you email to a random worker every week
“It is SO kind of you to go to work every day so that I don’t have to. Thanks to you I was able to buy an even bigger television this week”
Gary Lineker says he wants to pay *more* tax.
That’s funny because three years ago he took Government to court to pay *less* tax on his BBC millions.
Massive hypocrite? Surely not.
Gary will win. He will successfully usher in wealth taxes and destroy what remains of the UK economy.
Investment will dry up, the number of people living in poverty will explode and the UK will be used globally as an example to the world about the dangers of socialist ideology.
How is he winning? He’s winning by losing.
He sits opposite billionaires, investors, entrepreneur and professionals.
Gary knows his audience. He doesn’t have to win arguments - he just has to show how mad he can make the rich.
He lets them explain to him why wealth taxes won’t work. You can see how incredulous they are at the stupidity of his suggestions. They can’t help but talk down to him.
He looks sad and hopeless. The wealthy, successful people are mad at him. The don’t like his ideas….
…. And that is the winning move. Checkmate. @garyseconomics wins.
May be wrong. But I believe in modern era football he's our second highest appearance maker behind O'Connor. Proper legend. Gets way too much disrespect
It is a very satisfying video, and I implore everyone to watch it. But what is really fascinating is not that @DanNeidle and Gary disagree over wealth taxes. It's that they approach public policy from completely different *mindsets*.
Dan is fairly ruthless in separating morally appealing policies ('vibes') from their real-world effects. He asks: 'Will this do what it says on the tin?' 'What are the unintended consequences?' 'What does the evidence say?' and 'Could this be counterproductive?'
Gary asks none of those questions because, in my view, he fails to distinguish between good intentions and real-world outcomes. If something feels good and righteous, then the evidence must support it and nothing can possibly go wrong.
To me, that is a big problem with much of the Left's approach to economics. There is an assumption that moral feelings and good intentions naturally translate into good outcomes in the real world. THEY DON'T.
"I grew up on a council estate" is not an excuse for failure. You are sacrificing the future of generations of kids on the altar of your class envy -reversing even Labour's academy reforms.
0% of teachers think you're doing a great job. I'm not here to give you a pat on the back.
I speak for those people whose lives you're destroying and I'll NEVER stop speaking up for them.
The empty seats at the Oval are a disgrace. Day 4 of a Test match in London against good opposition in 25 degrees should be packed out but three figures for tickets is a joke. When will they learn?
The left last week: Attacking police officers is outrageous.
The left this week: Fracturing a policewoman's spine is fine.
No-one should be taking these idiots seriously.
I think possibly the best thing about Elon Musk becoming a trillionaire is how angry it makes a bunch of losers who've never built a thing in their lives.