In “Enchanted Land” by Arthur Mee, published in 1936, the term Thankful Village appeared for the first time. It referred to a village whose men, having gone to the Great War, had all returned alive. Out of tens of thousands of villages in England and Wales there were just 53 Thankful Villages, and none at all in Scotland or Ireland.
It is a minor obsession of mine, when I see a war memorial in a village or small town, to scan through the names and look for repeated surnames. It's amazing how often you see it and it's deeply sobering to think of families who lost several young boys and men in the same war. Vin
When we think of those that died in the First World War, were they fighting for the country or for the purpose of preserving the societal status quo.with the hierarchy still quaffing champagne and partying while young men from the labouring classes were slaughtered unnecessarily on the battlefield?.
I still can`t get over the fact that Kaiser Wilhelm II was Queen Victoria`s grandson - far from being an advocate for peace, he was the biggest protagonist for the whole thing kicking off. The monarchy ? - shower of interbred free-loading tossers the lot of them.
Will Fareham Conservatives deselect her?? He was very disloyal.when May was PM, she should have been deselected then.
Interesting statement from Deborah Feldman, a secular Jewish author residing in Germany. I’ve not heard mention of this before “The people who were horrifically murdered and defiled on 7 October belonged to the left-leaning, secular segment of Israeli society; many of them were activists for peaceful coexistence. Their military protection was forfeited for the sake of radical settlers in the West Bank, many of whom are militant fundamentalists. For many liberal Israelis, the state’s promise of security for all Jews has now been exposed as selective and conditional. Similarly in Germany, the protection of Jews has been interpreted selectively as to apply solely to those loyal to the rightwing nationalist government of Israel”
I believe in taxation, but I also believe that once you start taxing at 40,50 or 60% on a portion of earnings, two things happen. Firstly, some people are demotivated to earn more so entrepreneurs (that in turn may employ people) stagnate or cut back as the extra effort isn't worth it. Secondly, they will try to fiddle the system. Have a higher personal allowance of say 20k, then say 20-60k is 25%, anything over 65k is 35%. Scrap the stupid lower tax on dividends from your own company (as that just encourages business owners to pay themselves up to the threshold and then take the rest as dividends). What this will do is stop people from doing cash in hand jobs so more will be declared. remove a level of bureaucracy to business owners (as a lot less of their staff will have to pay tax) and encourage people to try to earn more as they will keep more. If you keep more, you spend more. Studies have shown (I have no source, this is from memory of a year or so ago) that overall the government will collect about 10-15% more in taxes with lower rates and higher thresholds. ^^This is my right wing stance to generate the taxes to pay for the Welfare and National Health service. Welfare should be there not as free money but to help and to encourage those that can work to try to get back on the payroll. Those that can't through sickness, disability etc should be fully supported. There will always be those that abuse any system, but by encouraging people to work by letting them keep more of what they earn will boost the public coffers and also make sure welfare goes to those that need it, not those that don't want to work or simple are caught in the trap where they are better off not working. There is no silver bullet, the way the tories have acted over the last few years has made people resent anyone who earns well and gives out the "tax those that earn well as they can afford it and are all fiddling anyway" feeling. Then you have public services. These IMO should be amongst the best paid jobs as they are the jobs that keep the country going. The old 'oh the NHS is so inefficient' is IMO true. If we could somehow cut the waste (I know, I know, Tory PPE etc), maybe that money could go to the infrastructure and the staff to make people proud to be doctors and nurses and want to be one again. The problem is I feel is that everyone has different views on different things and only lean one way in general to the other. The one party fits all doesn't work and never will. Maybe we need a coalition government with Labour and Conservative - a true 50/50 government so each side could keep the other in check. It will never happen and never work, but possibly the only way to keep everyone happy. There are probably so many holes in my arguments, but to be fair this is probably the first time I have actually thought about it like this.
There is something quite funny about Sunak trying to present himself as the change candidate and then literally appointing an ex Prime Minister to a Great Office of State via the Lords.
They had an opportunity to remove her this year, but the Fareham Conservatives are fully paid members of the lunatic wing, they will be more likely to rail against Rishi Sunak for sacking her.
Yesterday I had the absolute privilege of reading out the Roll of Honour of the fallen in the two World Wars from my village. I almost stumbled over the second of two brothers who died in the trenches, and when I read out the name of a gunner from WW2 I was very conscious that his nephew, my fellow parish councillor, was standing right next to me.
There's logic in the Cameron appointment given world affairs and Middle East knowledge and relationships/respect in the region. But it's an absolute golden nugget for the opposition to have some fun with!
From Sky News: Bringing David Cameron - who presumably from now on we must describe as Lord Cameron - into government as Foreign Secretary is not without risks for Rishi Sunak. That isn't just because his return to government has the rare potential to simultaneously antagonise both the right wing of the Conservative Party and floating voters still harbouring grievances about Mr Cameron's decision to call a Brexit referendum. It's also because there is still a cloud hanging over the enterprise for which the former PM is best-known in his post-Downing Street career: his involvement with the collapsed speciality finance group Greensill Capital. Mr Cameron was an advisor to the supply chain finance business, reportedly on a salary of £720,000, on whose behalf it later turned out he had lobbied government figures.
