But I think, if true, this is reallllly bad.
Donāt think anything this is toryism out in the open no different IMO to how they have always been .
1 Like
Itās the Guardian puffing a normal event to trigger allegations. Look at the Daily-Mail type language. Tiresome. They can do better than this.
Any leaking that was done, would have been done before the Budget in a much more discreet way.
1 Like
What do you think is wrong with the language Karen ? Iāve just read it and it seemed OK to me.
Oh - and by the way the ācutsā agenda was leaked !
Chris Greyās latest blog is interesting in this respect. He correctly identifies the 3 possible reasons for the debacle: incompetence. corruption, or using a crisis to force more austerity cuts - but concludes it must just be incompetence.
Iām not so sure. The fault in his analysis, it seems to me, lies in thinking these 3 explanations are mutually exclusive. But theyāre actually wholly compatible. Indeed, I think its likely that this government would want to combine corruptly rewarding their friends with laying the ground for more austerity - and that in pursuing this they would mishandle the whole deal.
4 Likes
Certainly Truss and Kwarteng are wholly corruptible.
Iām inclined to agree with you - the agenda for deeper public service cuts is compatible with the small state/low tax model that Trussā advisers favour and Iām sure is on the cards.
The NHS is being set up to fail this winter so that it can be accused of mis-management and āoutside management must be brought inā - even deeply dippy Truss knows that a direct attack on the NHS will not go down well with the populace.
1 Like
Did I hear right that Truss is threatening to expel MPs that vote against the mini-budget measures ?
I wrote a post a few weeks ago comparing the Tory party situation now to the mid 19th century, when it split over the Corn Laws, and was out of office for decadesā¦
It will be interesting to see if any do actually vote against.
Probably a few will merely abstain, which is the traditional manner in which MPās express dissatisfaction with their party.
Itās the whole way itās written Geoff. I only have a phone not a computer working, but if I got my yellow pencil out in Word then re-uploaded it fron pc then the whole thing would be yellow. They were really trying to puff it up.
PS I saw the āentrepreneurā excuse and thought the same.
I donāt think it needs to be āpuffed upā Karen. Itās rotten to the core. Look at the evidence of cronyism over the last three years. Why should it stop now?
1 Like
Well itās hard to understand that without any specific examples of what you mean Karen.
I have to say - and I have not only studied textual analysis, but taught it at university level - I can find little wrong with it.
What did strike me though was the Tory description of the party attendees as āBritainās leading entrepreneursā, while the only activities mentioned are investments of various kinds (fund management, property). This struck me because my analysis already indicated that the Tory party had become aligned not with real entrepreneurs (people the start enterprises) but with investors (people that manage their own and/or othersā wealth).
Geoff itās the whole thing. Rather similar to the āstoking class envyā type articles in the Daily Mail too. Perhaps quite normal for the Guardian, so doesnāt stand out to someone who reads the Guardian a lot?
But an impression given by āthe whole thingā is still actually conveyed by specific words used, even if it is a cumulative effect of many usages.
Does anybody else understand what Karen means ? Any specific examples from the article ?
I thought maybe this bit: āThe guests drank wine, champagne and cocktailsā - but that was a quote from the Sunday Times report !
Or is it objectionable that a private party has been reported at all (and by all major newspapers, not just The Guardian) ? If so I donāt agree - I think reporting of such events is clearly in the public interest.
No, I got the impression that reporting it was what was objectionable, because it can be interpreted as the guardian having a go at the blameless great and good, out of meanness. But quis custodiet ipsos custodies? We should know what they get up to (revolting bunch of self-seeking crooks brazenly swigging away with their snouts in the trough). Had the guardian said what I put in brackets then Karen would have a case.
4 Likes
Noā¦
1 Like
Why not? I thought to swig was to gulp something liquid or sloppy like swill. Presumably they take a deep breath and get swigging 
1 Like
Karen, I think the reporting is irrelevant (though fair comment IMO). But the optics are dreadful. As a loose parallel. imagine a CFO who made purchasing policy announcements and then some hours later was seen swigging Champagne with a selection of vendors that were about to make out like bandits as a result those announcements. How would the other vendors take that? It stinks of collusion and was a dreadful error of judgement.
Indeed, not a wealth generator amongst them. Profits through shuffling paper (or bits and bytes). In fact, through shorting they are wealth destroyers. Parasites feeding off misery.
1 Like
Swigging - drinking in large gulps straight from the bottle so the head would have to be tilted back. Snouts in troughs require the head to be tilted forward. I have no problem at all with the description of ārevolting bunch of self-seeking crooksā!
p.s. Sorry for the pedantry but Iāve just finished proof-reading a novel that was full of subtle word misuse so I was āin the zoneā 
2 Likes
All I can say is after years working with the sort of people concerned in several parts of the finance industry, and years sitting in C-suites with a birdseye view of what goes on, this is no more abnormal than the briefings Quoted Companies are allowed to give finance industry analysts, to which the retail investor (ie you and me).do not have access. Itās not abnormal and has been picked on to puff up by the Guardian.
I am not a fan but itās what goes on and there is far worse Iād prefer the Guardian would bring us actual news about.