Financial 'stretch' for UK to join Europe's Starlink rival, says minister A UK minister has told Parliament that joining Europe's answer to Starlink — Elon Musk's satellite-based mobile internet service — would be a "stretch" given the nation's current financial challenges. In December last year, the EU signed a contract with the Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by …
"the UK might end up as a US territory,"
Gitmo mk II ?
Perhaps it's time for the UK or more particularly England to be more realistic about its place in the world. Certainly not conceivably a superpower since Suez and now barely a regional power since Brexit. All in all, UK probably ranks around Portugal which at least had the common sense to remain in the EU (not afaik that there was any desire to leave.)
"Rule, Britannia ! Rule the waves: Britons never will be slaves." Probably fortunate that the average Brexiteer is probably not bright enough for the role.
With the humiliating fall of the US hegemony, England will probably have to give up the colonies of Gibraltar, Las Malvinas, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to even get a sniff of the protection it sorely needs from a Federal European Army
Well Gibraltar has already got its free movement back again.
Perhaps it's time for the UK or more particularly England to be more realistic about its place in the world. Certainly not conceivably a superpower since Suez and now barely a regional power since Brexit. All in all, UK probably ranks around Portugal which at least had the common sense to remain in the EU (not afaik that there was any desire to leave.)
Portugal has a GDP of $0.28 trillion. The UK has a GDP of $3.3 trillion.
So with a GDP of (by your own figures) of over twelve times that of Portugal, fine, you somehow think that the UK ranks around the same as Portugal, OK, fine that’s an ‘interesting’ way of seeing things.
Not entirely sure what point you are trying to make.
Not entirely sure what point you are trying to make.
How have you been around long enough to get a silver badge without seeing what quoting somebody else looks like?
For the avoidance of doubt, I quoted somebody elses comment relative to the worth of the UK and Portugal, and then pointed out the figures with the GDP of both which as you note are about 12x higher for us than Portugal.
I think that speaks loudly enough for itself without needing additional commentary.
All in all, UK probably ranks around Portugal which at least had the common sense to remain in the EU
Au contraire. The UK's economy is 12x the size of Portugal's, and significantly more diversified with high tech engineering, services and manufacturing (compared with Portugal's heavy reliance on agriculture and tourism - neither a bad thing, but lacking diversity).
Perhaps more importantly, the UK has retained the Pound. Meaning we can set our own monetary policy and interest rates.
The fact the government chooses not to avail themselves of the flexibility to invest in infrastructure and rebuilding the nation is deeply unfortunate. But they do have the ability to print - within reason - money for use in domestic infra projects (which benefits the private sector and drives growth, and will mostly be recouped through tax anyway).
Whereas the Portugese government has about as much monetary power as Manchester City Council. They are a currency user and anything they wish to spend must be claimed through tax first. They have a very limited ability to - with a few keypresses - finance 50year bonds for long-term investment.
The UK should have remained, and we should even join Schengen. But the Euro has been a disaster. People overlook the fact that the Greek debt crisis is still ongoing - the ECB just punt them billions of Euros each month to pay their bills. People will try and blame the Greeks for their own profligacy or not paying tax - and an effective tax system is of course important. But the economic impact of having a single monetary policy across economies as diverse as Greece, Germany, Luxembourg and Portugal cannot be overstated. Someone is always going to be getting screwed - and it's never Germany (or - by extension - the industrialised/manufacturing economies).
Which is what Starmer and Farage want. Both of them suck up to the Orange Jesus as much as possible.
Why they are mad enough to want to join a dictator is beyond my pay grade unless he has something on both of them.
Trump is not to be trusted with anything. He even cheats at Golf for heavens sake.
If Herr Drumpf can't have Canada as the 51st State and Greenland has told him to FSCK off, I guess we are fifth choice as he won't even consider DC or Puerto Rico for statehood.
|Time to natiionalise his UK Assets. Pay him 1p on the dollar.
Peter Preston's 1998 novel 51st State describes how it might happen. The book opens with the British government accidentally losing a referendum on the EU, and was widely praised by The Times' reviewer - a certain Michael Gove. I wonder what happened to him...
the UK might end up as a US territory
Don't give Trump any ideas!
The choice between becoming the 51st state of their most famously rebellious colony or going crawling back to the EU would be an interesting one. Especially since there is no way the EU would offer them their former "halfway in" deal. It would be full EU membership including adopting the euro and abiding by all EU laws if they wanted in.
"Agreed and the people who voted incorrectly"
Wow, just wow!
Now regardless of your view of Brexit being a good or bad thing; seriously, you are advocating that people who voted ‘incorrectly’ (and by the way, who decides what is correct or incorrect; presumably you), should be somehow rounded up and punished (imprisoned).
Like I said wow, just wow!
“They were mislead [sic] not blameles [sic]”
Sorry but what?
If they were, actually misled, then by definition they are blameless, yes?
You know, the normal, accepted (well by some) view is that anyone you voted to leave the EU are knuckle-dragging, uneducated morons, who probably shouldn’t be entitled to vote at all. Whereas those who voted to remain are high IQ people, the intelligent cream of society, the superiors. Now assuming that you are a person who voted ‘remain’ (would seem reasonable) but seems unable to string two lines together while not being able to properly punctuation them and also make two spelling mistakes, might well suggest otherwise!
Also while we are on the subject, why did you post as AC, do you not have the confidence of your view to post as yourself? It’s not like a mob with pitchforks and torches are going to turn up at your door is it!
This post has been deleted by its author
Schengen membership would open a huge number of doors, but only if it is accepted by both 'main' parties. Anything less and we are just eating the crumbs at the table.
That will take quite a while to happen, probably more than ten years, as we have to wait more of the racist Tory Reform[1] voters to die off. A change to the electoral system may help speed things up, but I can't see Labour or Tory wanting that -- Turkeys and Christmas, as they say. Iceland's possible 2027 referendum, and Norway's increased interest in the EU again, may prove to be a spark to start a debate again. One thing is certain, the ground is not stable and not settled. Brexit is a forever process, not an event.
[1] There is little Labour-Reform movement. Disgruntled Labour voters tend to go Green or Lib Dem. The only thing most of the Tory and Reform voters really want is to stop immigration. They are unwilling (or unable?) to listen to and understand the complex reasons why we have so much immigration. They are predominantly old, and when they were young the country was white. And it is wrong it has changed. Wrong!
probably more than ten years, as we have to wait more of the racist Tory Reform[1] voters to die off
That's not going to happen. When I was a kid I naively thought racism in the US would mostly be a thing of the past once the last generation of segregationist southerners died off. Well the majority of the adults of the pre-civil rights south are dead now, but it isn't just a dwindling number of octagenarians left carrying the banners of the KKK and Nazis like I assumed. Oh for the innocence of youth!
I still see people here defending Brexit, despite the decline in the UK's status and economy in the intervening decade. I don't know if they're fooling themselves into believing things would be even worse if not for Brexit, or that those are sacrifices they're willing to make to keep out the brown people, but it seems unlikely they're going to change their tune. They are undoubtedly going to be influencing some number of younger people who will believe them when they're told things would get worse if they reversed course on Brexit.
"I don't know if they're fooling themselves into believing things would be even worse if not for Brexit, or that those are sacrifices they're willing to make to keep out the brown people,”
Oh no, you have fallen for the obvious knee-jerk response that everyone who voted to leave is a racist and just wants to keep out the brown people. Tell me do you have any evidence for this, and alas no, just stating that ‘it’s obvious isn’t it’, won’t really cut it - sorry! Yes probably some ‘leave’ voters are/were racists, thought that leaving would keep ‘jonny foreigner’ out? I think it’s far more complex and nuanced than that.
I don’t think that the ‘leave' campaign won, rather than the ‘remain’ campaign simply failed to make a compelling argument. Rather than admitting that the EU is a flawed, not perfect, organisation (and what organisation isn’t flawed and imperfect), but being a member of it offers xyz advantages, no it’s not perfect but we are working on it, which I think people would understand and be sympathetic to, instead they ran a negative campaign, the UK can’t possibly survive on it's own, unemployment will become the norm, roaming bands of zombies will inherit the earth, cats will sleep with dogs, etc.
"That's not going to happen. When I was a kid I naively thought racism in the US would mostly be a thing of the past once the last generation of segregationist southerners died off. Well the majority of the adults of the pre-civil rights south are dead now, but it isn't just a dwindling number of octagenarians left carrying the banners of the KKK and Nazis like I assumed. Oh for the innocence of youth!”
Yes, exactly, there is the old saying ‘if you aren’t a left-winger in your youth, then you have no heart, if you are still a left-winger in your 30’s then you have no brain’!
The assumption is that as people age, they tend to become more ‘right-wing’ that they understand that the idealism they embraced isn’t actually viable or even desirable for themselves, now that they have a job, a family, a degree of financial independence and the idealised idea that everything should be owned by everyone suddenly isn’t so attractive*
And that does appear to be the case, after all in 1979 in the UK the Tory party under Thatcher was elected into power, now in theory then the left wing should be ascendent as surely most people who voted for the Torys, what 45 years ago are long gone. But the polls suggest that if there was an election today, then probably Nigel Farrage would be the PM tomorrow, and his Reform party is arguably even more to the right than the Thatcher government.
So we have to consider that this assumption is just wrong.
"probably more than ten years, as we have to wait more of the racist Tory Reform[1] voters to die off”
And although that might well be your wish, and thats fine enough, alas I think you will find that the ones dying off are more than replaced by people growing up.
I know a fair few Brexit supporters, including family and friends. They are all racist, some proud of being so, and they all understand economics about as well as a potato does. Most still support it and believed that it simply hasn't been completed yet - more extreme policies required etc. Most have quit supporting the Tories and turned to Reform. If too many Labour voters feel that Starmer isn't left wing enough for them and Tory voters don't think the Tories are cruel and racist enough for them, and they all stay at home, Reform supporters will do what MAGA folk have done - vote in droves and get their idol into power.
Labour really need to get their act together and deal with Reform by being honest about the need for and value of migrant labour. They need to realise that business as usual is not an option in a country that has impoverished itself and damaged itself so badly. I just don't think they have the talent, ability, honesty, self-awareness or spine to deal with it. The Tories will just ape Reform in the hope of getting their members back.
By denying the existence of the damage that Brexit has done, both mainstream parties cannot explain to voters why the place is such a mess now. Reform will simply blame it on migrants and the environment, run with Trump-style politics and win. As for the focus on reducing (even legal) immigration, the UK is failing for want of workers in all sectors from agricultural labourers and carers to tech, whilst the universities have had their economic models destroyed by limits on foreign students. Replacing them with locals just doesn't work. It's a political fantasy. The UK economy has been built on easy access to skilled labour that is not otherwise available. You cannot force locals to fill those roles. Beggaring them with benefit cuts won't do it, and forced labour (workfare) is crap labour. Better to condemn Reform as liars, racists and idiots rather than pandering to them, or the UK will just get worse.
The absence of the UK has damaged the EU too, with an increase in populist right wing nutters. However, I don't see any return to the EU for the UK in the near or mid term. I think the UK will just decline from here on - a sort of endless rerun of the 1970s, and degrade further and faster if Reform get in. Some things are so broken they cannot be fixed.
Labour really need to get their act together and deal with Reform by being honest about the need for and value of migrant labour
Depends, how long can they wait until the next election? They might not have to say anything, they'll have the example of the US to point to. Because Steven Miller aka Trump's Himmler has set targets for ICE to roundup 3000 people per day. Under Obama it peaked at around 1200 per day during his last year, Trump and Biden never reached that number. Because of those quotas, they're mostly ignoring the "violent criminals" Trump promised to round up. Because getting the violent ones is time consuming, resource intensive, and dangerous. Easier to go to farms, Lowe's parking lots and restaurants to round up people who aren't violent or criminals but still count toward meeting their quota.
It was already becoming such an issue with farmers and business owners that early last month Trump promised that wouldn't happen any more. Then a few days later the White House announced a change of course. Makes you wonder who is actually in charge of the deportations. Though it could be that Trump wants to be SEEN as being on the side of farmers and business owners who rely on migrant labor, illegal or not, by making that statement, then letting his people announce the TACOing of policy.
Anyway, now that the "big bill" has been passed which will give ICE/CBP a budget larger than than the military budgets of the UK, France and Germany combined no doubt they'll be expecting to step up those deportation quotas in a big way. Inevitably that means more migrant labor is going to be rounded up and sent home, and with no plan (and little appetite in MAGA) for increasing legal immigration to pick up the slack. It is going to be a huge problem for farms where machines can't do everything. You don't need much labor if you are farming corn, wheat or soybeans, but most of the other crops/produce isn't and/or can't be automated.
Because of those quotas, they're mostly ignoring the "violent criminals" Trump promised to round up. Because getting the violent ones is time consuming, resource intensive, and dangerous.
Uhuh.. And the far-left obstructing ICE agents, or using & abusing the legal system to prevent the deportation of illegal aliens has nothing to do with it? But then the far-left loves lables, and hates the legal system. Well, not all lables, after all it often refuses to call illegal immigrants illegal immigrants. Shame the US (and UK) doesn't charge those people with more obstruction, or assisting offenders.
You don't need much labor if you are farming corn, wheat or soybeans, but most of the other crops/produce isn't and/or can't be automated.
Yep, cannabis farming can be pretty labour intensive. Also often illegal, but then if you're an illegal immigrant you'll take whatever money you can get. Picking beans, pockets, shelfves or maybe getting work stuffing ballots.
Borders are arbitrary lines drawn by men, land often taken by conquest and wholesalre genocide, attempts to eradicate indigenous culture, religion and language and Ethnic cleansing.
If they want to kick out all the illegal immigrants - well then they are going to need a LOT of aircraft and ships to remove all those who are there since 1500 and something.....
One could probably also extend that to "the majority of Brexit voters weren't racist but the majority of racists were Brexit voters". If you dig into the numbers, the UK is actually remarkably tolerant by global and European standards.
I would ask what the intended point is of the statement? I think it's reasonable to say that plenty of racists voted against the Conservatives in the last election on the basis of the race of their leaders and even more will probably do so at the next election if Badenoch stays in charge. That doesn't affect the legitimacy of Labour's recent victory or a future one or say anything nasty about the average Labour voter.
I thought one of the arguments made for Brexit was that the EU freedom of movement principle was itself racist, because it allowed freedom of, y'know, movement to Europeans and not those from other continents? In fact your UKIP championed opening visas to Commonwealth countries rather than allowing continued entry of EU citizens and this seems to have been acted on post-Brexit with most of your new visas issued to people of colour from the Commonwealth.
@JohnMurray
"They're 'racist' because they believe the 'free' 'press' about ravening hordes of coloured rapists running around"
That sounds like a poor choice of example due to recent events. Although I am not that is an EU issue for UK authorities to support and protect these rape gangs.
@AC
"The stats don't bear out your prejudices, the majority of groomers and rapists are white British folk."
The scandal isnt that the rooming gangs exist it is that they were allowed to exist and continue and effectively protected from the law by those who should have been protecting the victims. That it happened decades ago before anyone could be bothered to deal with this is a serious issue. And these aint individuals committing the crime but organised gangs of groomers/rapists. And instead of being an isolated incident these were happening around the country!
Even the guardian doesnt try to avoid reporting this- https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/16/grooming-gangs-in-uk-thrived-in-culture-of-ignorance-casey-report-says
@BartyFartsLast
"Spoiler, Junky won't read it and if they do, they'll ignore it, deny it, tell you it's part of some random conspiracy theory etc."
Why? I took a look. Its blurb about Tommy Robinson and bad rich men etc. My best response is my previous post to an AC (possibly the same one)- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2025/07/05/uk_budget_to_join_iris_not_there/#c_5103132
I dont know if it is projection or you just have your little straw man opinion of me. Either way- there there go lie down now.
Spoiler, Junky won't read it
Sadly, you were spot on. So it appears articles that do not fit in with their world view (after a cursory scan of the title and a few lines) are just disgarded with no consideration. I assume the same with others' comments and posts. So not worth engaging?
If anything the politicians, media and their nudge campaigns seem to be pushing the country further right into some quite dark places, only a few years ago people lost jobs for suggesting we sink migrant boats, now it seems almost manifesto material for the swivel eyed loons of reform ( it is heartening to see one lose the whip for what might be fraud, if they carry on losing councillors and MPs at this rate they'll be out of our local authorities and government entirely by the next GE)
Yeah, I'm going to agree with DS999 here. Whilst I think racism in society is decreasing a bit, there's a consistent narrative from some quarters that it's the older generation that are the problem.
Look at the voter mix - it's a problem right across age ranges.
If you want nuance, there is a distinction to be drawn between active racism i.e. making concerted steps to exclude people from certain races, and passive racism where you know *damn well* that a party is incredibly racist, but because other factors are more important to you (usually money) you don't care one way or another who else your vote affects.
I can't claim complete innocence here because I voted Labour, despite being extremely disappointed by their stance on immigration (even if it is understandable based on the 2019 election, and reductions of vote share in the 00s due to in part increased immigration). However, the UK still uses first past the post, and there's no viable choices in most constituencies other than Labour and Tory (yes, yes, sometimes LD and Greens are an option), so Labour it was.
Look at the voter mix - it's a problem right across age ranges.
But in different ways. Older folks have a sort of wistful attitude that it was better "before", yet often have very cordial relations with neighbours and friends of different races. Younger ones have a much more "send the bastards home today" attitude, and often refuse to even associate with "them" (i.e. anyone who isn't "us"). That latter attitude is far more of a problem.
I would be pretty certain 'before' is a movable feast. I pretty much wasn't even a twinkle in my Dad's eye when Windrush was going on.
There will be a cycle based on notable increases in immigration, which then settles down as communities are integrated. More recently there was a notable increase in Polish immigration (to the point now that it is/was a stereotype that Polish tradespeople do better work than British ones), and various other increases due to changes during Labour's previous term in power, but that's old enough now that many young adults weren't even born when EU freedom of movement rules were relaxed.
Rinse and repeat with other nationalities for various reasons at later dates. There is always a 'before'.
Or if it had actually defined what Brexit was, basically remaining in the Single Market (soft brexit, at the time of the referendum) or not. (Or even a preferential vote for the 3 options.)
The lack of definition enabled a bait and switch - promoting all the costs of a soft brexit and the benefits of hard brexit. (And then redefining soft and hard brexits to being with or without a trade deal, after they had won).
It is not just Brexit, though anti-Brexit (i.e. anti democratic will of the people) voices keep going on about it. Liz Truss and her boneheaded approach to economics did so much damage. Labour are no better. The thing that links Labour and the Tories is many of their top politicians went to Oxford or Cambridge, where conceit is driven into their bones, giving them a sense of superiority over the great unwashed public. There are too many lawyers in parliament. They can argue all day long about changing a flat tyre, but most of them would not actually be able to do it.
Britain is nearly bankrupt. This has been coming for years. Britain in reality is a small power pretending to be a major power. It's major power status was built on stealing the property of other countries, stealing the people of other countries, hyperscale drug peddling, and so on, AKA empire building. Without that empire, what does it have? Laundering dirty money in the City - something that can very easily be moved overseas.
Britain does have money for when it is expedient - £37 billion for Cameron's friend, Dido Harding, for starters. But not for something actually useful.
Not lawyers but PPE grads.
The typical Lab MP is PPE grad who then gets a job with an existing MP before standing in an unwinnable constituancy before taking over a safe seat.
I interviewed one of these who didn't make the grade in '24. A useless TWAT who thought that they would be running my company inside a year because he got a 1st Class PPE degree. Hint.... I've been in business for 23 years and employ 48 people. Del Boy would have called him a plonker. He was insulted when I told him that he needed to learn the business from the bottom up first.
The guy I hired last August is proving to be a great asset even if he is working in the workshop alongside highly skilled aero engineers. He is proud but not boastful and importantly, able to hold his hand up when he messes up. That gets respect.
Politics, philosophy and economics was introduced as "Modern Greats" ("Greats" is classics) to provide a specialist preparation for work in the upper reaches of the civil service. It has, over the years, been extremely successful in fulfilling that aim.
Having been in the space industry, and worked for the relevant companies (and still got the contacts at senior level), I can assure you that
A) IRIS2 is a really shit program, a total waste of money, of little or no use technically even if it were free
B) Its already 8 years behind, despite being kicked off just earlier this year. Officially it was going to be in service by 2030. Unofficially, internal estimates are that *if there is no further slip*, the absolute earliest in-service date is 2038. And thats not for actual users, thats the beta-test.
C) Theres a high likelihood it will be cancelled anyway, although not before frittering away the best part of €5bn on little more than PowerPoints. The problem is, that all the best contracts are due to go to France. And neither Germany nor Italy nor Spain see why they should pay for whats basically a French system.
C) Theres a high likelihood it will be cancelled anyway, although not before frittering away the best part of €5bn on little more than PowerPoints. The problem is, that all the best contracts are due to go to France. And neither Germany nor Italy nor Spain see why they should pay for whats basically a French system.
How plausible do you think it would be to merge IRIS2 into a OneWeb V2? It does seem as though IRIS2 is reinventing the wheel a bit, especially when it's mostly the same players involved in both. I also think it's interesting from a Brexit PoV. The UK can now choose to contribute to IRIS2, or not, and isn't forced to potentially donate to another expensive white elephant that may or may not fly.
Plus the earlier UK decision to rescue OneWeb, which I think happened post-Brexit and the UK could do without the risk of running foul of the EU's state aid/subsidy rules. Which never really worked because the UK tended to play fair, and competitors within the EU often didn't. So a bit like the IRIS2 contract shenanigans and how work shares for projects like this tend to get allocated.
The GBP:EUR rate has been pretty stable from 2011 to today, apart from a large and unusual change around 2015 when the Euro weakened a lot during the Greek currency crisis when it looked like Greece might be forced to leave the Eurozone. The referendum, and indeed Brexit itself, has had no significant impact.
@Doctor Syntax
"When somebody goes on about the cost of this that of other it's always wise to consider the cost of the alternative."
That is precisely what I just did. Look-
You: "What's the cost of not joining?"
Me: "Minus however many millions/billions they piss up the wall. Also known as saving."
You went on about the cost, I considered the alternative to making a starlink clone.
Even The Spectator now thinks it was a stupid idea, and they paid BJ millions.
That's because The Spectator were idiots. As are the EU given Eutelsat OneWeb has a complete constellation in service with UK and French governments still owning a chunk, plus golden shares. The mistake most people make is assuming that OneWeb is intended to be a Starlink rival. Initial PR may have implied this to help with fundraising, but it isn't now. Starlink is going after mass-market consumer satellite broadband, OneWeb isn't. It's focusing on government and business connectivity, with a heavy focus on government, and they don't make it very easy for businesses to get the service.
But if you've got embassies, consular buildings etc serving British or French government, you can get a secure service either as primary or backup and save a lot of money vs renting terrestrial connections. Plus terminal portability comes in rather handy.. Which is back to idiots & the EU wanting to spaff billions on a duplicate service to one that EU members already own a large chunk of. Eutelsat will happily take the money, but given there are already orbital slots and frequencies allocated to OneWeb, it'd probably make a lot more sense to merge any IRIS-specific capabilities into OneWeb v2 satellites and call it good.
Kinda curious if the EU would get slots & spectrum anyway given the popularity and already crowded orbits. It seems to me that it's shades of all the overbuild that happened with terrestrial broadband.
Got it.
Not these Antipodean horrors Bin Juice is the perfect mixer for gin or vodka but de Pfeffel another travesty; A man whose obituary is undoubtedly eagerly anticipated by so many and could only be regretted by very few.
It’s a beautiful contrast, really. One unstable billionaire blankets the planet in satellites for fun. Twenty-seven nations claw their way through bureaucracy to build something public, sovereign, resilient.
And then there’s Britain: hunched in the corner, pockets inside out, muttering about hard choices. No satellites, no plan, just a slow bleed into debt repayments and privatised decay. That's the real progress.
And then there’s Britain: hunched in the corner, pockets inside out, muttering about hard choices. No satellites, no plan, just a slow bleed into debt repayments and privatised decay. That's the real progress.
Ah, the ignorance of the Remnants. UK can sit this one out because it already owns a chunk of OneWeb, who already have this-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutelsat_OneWeb#Launches
Total number of operational satellites: 652 as of 20 Oct 2024
Which may or may not include a GPS-alike service. One of those things that's probably only available to qualified & vetted customers only though. So you have it a bit bass-ackwards and it's the EU that has no satellites, and is now slowly coming up with a plan..
... with a hopeful future Conservative leader watching a video being shown to him by a known pornographer, helping him avoid millions in tax. The person I'm talking about is, of course Robert 'hey, have you bought a tube ticket?' Jenrick. What did he call himself during the last leadership race, BobbyJ?
That hasn't stopped Starmer committing to something like £125 billion a year to Nato, over a trillion a decade, and whatever that 100 year partnership deal with Ukraine will cost us - and we didn't even get a lucrative mineral deal in return.
As usual, the government claims it is so short of cash that it really does have to take money from the disabled, the sick and poor, they have slashed overseas aid by half, cannot afford anything Brits might like them to invest in, but can always find billions down the back of the sofa when it chooses to.
"cannot afford anything Brits might like them to invest in,”
But tell me, what do Brits want to invest in, you have done research, you have interviewed a statistically valid sample haven’t you? Now I’m going to suggest that the majority of Brits would answer ‘overseas aid’, fuck them, end all of it! Be careful what you wish for.
"That hasn't stopped Starmer committing to something like £125 billion a year to Nato, over a trillion a decade,”, OK that’s fine, but is that money going to be send abroad or will it pay for jobs here?
Hypothetically if Starmer had announced a building project in the UK (cough HS2, cough) which will cost £x billion but will support x thousand jobs, would you be OK with that?
"cannot afford anything Brits might like them to invest in,”
Which is? You have checked what ‘Brits might like to invest in”, don’t tell me that you have just crashed into a thread and made a statement without actually doing some kind of checking first? Surely not!
the majority of Brits would answer ‘overseas aid’, fuck them, end all of it! Be careful what you wish for.
I think that would benefit all. The giver (us) and the receiver. Seeing as a significant portion probably never gets to the needy but greases the palm of those that can pay some back, either in contracts or swiss bank accounts. If you examine what was going on with USAID it gives an indication of what so called "aid" is really about.
England (and I mean England) never has a pot to piss in even though taxation is really high. EU countries always seem to have a bit o'cash lying around. My local council here in Spain is up to its ass in staff, the streets are cleaned daily, bins emptied, grass cut, big parties organised and my council tax is less than 200€ a year, my car tax about 150€ etc etc. High speed trains offering cheap fares shoot about all over the Spanish countryside whereas England can't even build a railway between Birmingham and Central London without fucking it up and spunking money all over the place. Mystified.
The UK's selling off utilities etc. so that they could be loaded up with debt and be bled dry rather than invest.
Endless streams of government 'consultants', revolving doors, jobs for the boys, PPI etc.
The failure to reform things like leasehold, and the ability of the great estates to pass on billions while paying a fraction of the tax most are exposed to.
The common theme is extract from the masses, put nothing back.
I'm on hols in the Spain, smooth roads, low prices, good infrastructure, bins emptied, all things the UK is unable to manage.
Pretty much my experience when travelling in Europe too...I find myself in Germany fairly frequently visiting my partner and the difference between there and the UK is night and day.
Even just something like a short-notice passport renewal was handled by turning up at a local office in their village, rather than the centralised "will it turn up in time" process we have here from our cut to the bone public services. Admittedly travelling around with Deutsche Bahn definitely isn't as good as it used to be, but they're still better at providing information than the operators here.
Yet we have BS from Farridge and co. that taxes can be cut further - you'd think after Johnson we'd have wised up a little to those grifters.
"It will turn up in time" turned out to be 4 days once received - so 5 in total.
In fact my new passport turned up a day before the old one was returned.
Whereas the French passport took 3 months ...
You had a good experience in Germany, I'm happy for you, but don't believe the UK services are unilaterally really bad compared to everywhere else, it's just not true.. but, as always, YMMV depending on where and who you are and what you're asking
Taxation in the UK is not "really high", though it is high by comparison with historical UK rates.
Between £20k and £50k (roughly) you'd be paying 37% tax in Spain. It's 20% in the UK. Employers pay National Insurance in Spain of around 30% and employees pay around 6% whereas in the UK its 15% and 8% currently (though the contributions are capped in both countries). The UK also has Council Tax which is not income-related and difficult to compare, though it could easily add 7-10% to your effective tax rate. If you look at the overall tax take on that 50K it's probably around 70% in Spain and 50% in the UK. If you look solely at the employee component it's more equal, but still higher in Spain.
The UK has tried to keep tax rates artificially low so borrowing has increased while public services and infrastructure have crumbled. Taxes are going up in the UK because that can't go on indefinitely - so we're now paying more for less. The lesson for the UK is, I think, that higher taxes are sustainable, create a better quality of life and result in less money being wasted on interest payments and urgent repairs.
When you add up all taxation, it is very high and a disincentive for the professionals (us) and middle classes. Unless you break through to being rich enough to pay tax accountants and lawyers you can't hang on to the money you earn. You think you can when young, when old you start looking at accumulated assets and how you can pass them onto the children. You can't because inheritance tax hasn't kept up with inflation which is another tax.
So taxes; corporation tax, income tax, purchase taxes, inheritance/capital gains tax and inflation. Taxes paid upon taxes. It's a siphon and it doesn't all come back. There is no way I will get a return on my investments in services. We would be better off paying small taxes to help the unfortunate but not fund lifestyle choices and making our own arrangements for the stuff we need. Don't think corporation taxes are paid by the business either. A business is a legal entity, it does nothing. The shareholders, staff and people who use its products or services pay the tax. Mostly ordinary people. We are amongst the shareholders via our pensions - something else this government wants to tax by forcing 10% to be invested in what they want. I can't see those things being profitable or the fund would already invest.
When you add up all taxation
That's pretty much what I just did. You may feel it's very high, but it really isn't in international terms.
In the end, money is for spending, not for hanging on to. Money sitting in savings accounts or tied up in property is money that isn't contributing to investment and development.
The real problem is that the UK has prioritised derisking assets over derisking human existence. The reason people want to accumulate assets is that their pensions will be miserable, their social care in old age will be abysmal, their health care will be a lottery and their children won't be able to afford a place to live. This is the worst of all worlds - we have an asset-rich older generation who are entirely risk-averse and won't spend and an asset-poor younger generation who can barely afford a lottery ticket. It doesn't really matter if your income is consumed by tax or by rent, if the vast majority of your income is consumed by non-discretionary spending you're going to be miserable. We seemed to have pitched taxation at the precise level that makes that inexorable because we seem unwilling to use taxation to solve the actual problem people experience in their daily lives. In the end, that means taking more money off old people like me. And quite right, too.
"Money sitting in savings accounts or tied up in property is money that isn't contributing to investment and development."
This is bollocks. People don't keep their money hidden in their mattress. If it's in a savings account, the bank is investing it. And for most people their savings are in a pension account, which is also invested.
the bank is investing it
If the bank is a building society, then it's likely lending it back out to people to buy more idle assets.
A commercial bank is probably using the money as collateral for the speculative trading in financial instruments from which it derives the bulk of its profit. Banks rarely invest - i.e. put their own (or your) money into new ventures - they'll happily handle an IPO or issue a reasonably-secured business loan but they're not subscribing to new shares unless they get the IPO very wrong. Pension funds, I'll grant you, are a different matter.
This is about property rights, individual rights. Money is a means of exchange, for ordinary people it represents our labour. I do not want to work for you, I want to work for my family and myself. If you want to do more work for others, there are a million charities out there. Take your hands of what's mine or perhaps someone will come and cram you in a little flat and take your stuff. I have no objections to paying tax for shared services and a safety net for the unfortunate. But I do not want to pay for your crazy schemes or war or to enrich you. I do not want to die in poverty because you spaffed away my labour on the already rich or some bozo that spent all his money in the pub while pretending he couldn't work with anxiety. If you want to work for others, then I have a lot of work for you on my garden, decorating and if you're a developer I've got some coding jobs for you. I wont pay you directly but you can claim a very basic living off all our taxes.
Show me where real communism is and actually working for the people.
"we have an asset-rich older generation who are entirely risk-averse and won't spend"
We grew up i a world where money was short. As did out parents and grandparents. What's more, it was the same for us. I got bank statements in the middle of the month so I'd be able to work out how bad things would be by the end of the month - and they were.. We've also seen a lot of inflation over the years. Once you've had a few decades of that you don't forget it. You can't get over the idea that it will all go pear-shaped tomorrow.
Money was for essentials and anything left over was to save for the disaster waiting round the corner. Even when you've accumulated a bit you spend it carefully.
In the end, money is for spending
Yes eventually at the time and place of my choosing. Money is a representation of my labour, it should be mine to give when I want and for me to do with the proceeds whatever I want. If you think my labour, my body and my mind are for you to decide what happens to it we have a fundamental disagreement. When other people think they should decide it's called dictatorship. It also always results that those deciding, give themselves more than those they decide for, and if people object they are imprisoned or executed.
The real problem with the UK and why the young can't afford anything is because they don't receive much of their labour. It is skimmed via a complex system that hands it to an elite who are now bidding for everything. That is why taxes are high and we are being progressively blocked from accumulating capital because that starts to give you power. If you accumulate assets they can be used to fund political parties, hire lawyers and even give children a head start via a functioning school and a deposit on a property. It allows those that are careful, diligent and skilled to have more. When you force equity you get the Soviet Union, a saying of the people was; "we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us" where it was estimated 50% or more of income was blackmarket and people not senior in the party quickly became impoverished.
Communism and socialism (a precursor to communism) do not work for the people anymore than fascism. Any form of dictatorship does not provide the best outcomes for people and that includes psychological controls, censorship and de-platforming, stopping bank accounts and all the other nasty tricks that are played on dissenters to to stop them being heard or being voted for. The system is hugely rigged and people need to get a memory. Remember all that stuff about Russia being on the run in Ukraine? BS. All that stuff about mask wearing, distancing, vax being not needed by healthy or children then it is needed. You can sit down without a mask but going to the toilet... One vax and its over, oh sorry now you need more. Wake Up! You're being abused and conned everyday. Almost everything on TV news and papers is twisted to support the movement of power and money.
The question to ask is who has the money now. It doesn't just dissappear, it moves into smaller chunks distributed amongst the club members and we aint in the club.
There's an example here-
https://davidturver.substack.com/p/ecotricity-dale-vince-green-energy-for-dummies
Dale has navigated the subsidy, regulatory and political landscapes to collect over £123m in subsidies and more than £21m from administering the FiT scheme. Yet, despite receiving generous subsidies each year and being able to charge his customers more than the price cap, Dale’s companies struggle to make a profit.
Yet the ecohippy managed to donate a lot of money to Labour, buy a castle and a football club. And his subsidy farming business is small beans compared to Drax or Octopus. But the subsidy farmers increase the cost of energy, which then increases the cost of everything, which increases inflation. And because the subsidies are generally index linked, the cost of energy is automagically increased every year. Businesses close, or off-shore, but Ed Millibrain is fine with this because he's saving the planet.. even though 'Net Zero' for the UK will make no measurable difference to UK or global temperatures.
It's clear that most of the people who think that the UK is dreadful have never actually lived in other countries that they think are so wonderful.
After decades living in France I can say that the UK is not significantly better or worse. Taxes? French rates may not seem much different, until you add in the 20-30% additional social charges which were added to allow a government to keep it's "no new taxes" promise. If your company happens to pay a bonus in the form of shares, expect to be paying 64% total tax+charges (no wonder purely French companies rarely offer such bonuses, only French subsidiaries of international ones). Sure, motorways have few potholes, but they're privately-run toll roads. Trains? TGVs are great, but local commuter trains as as overcrowded and unreliable as the ones in the UK. The French pension system is running at such a deficit that it will soon be bankrupt, except that legally it isn't allowed to be bankrupt. That's a major car crash coming in a couple of years. The French health system has some advantages over the NHS, but at a cost - everyone has to have employer-provided insurance to cover the 30-40% that the state service doesn't pay. My council taxes were much the same as the ones in the UK, but I had to take my own recycling to the tip, it isn't collected from the house.
It's swings and roundabouts, don't be misled by holiday visits which tend, naturally enough, to be to the nice, wealthy, spots.
Why does this need to be a state sponsored thing? We have cables. It's not as if many are unable to get Internet in our small country. There isn't really a remote that we care about. By definition hardly anyone lives in remote areas so satellite comms can stand on its own commercial feet.
Well there are relatively few of them but they punch above their weight; noisy lot ;) I suppose there are quite a few if you include immigrants to England. Big mistake letting that wall fall to ruin. Maybe when they get in the EU we can resurrect a border?
(Going for a record in down votes)
The other week we were in an hotel in the West Midlands. It wasn't in a village. It used satellite for its internet connection. Once you get out into the countryside you have a FTTC/ FTTP or you have a miserable connection. In fact it's not even either/or; friend who actually lives about a mile close to the exchange than I do has, for some strange reason, FTTC to the same cabinet as myself and a miserable connection. The only fibre near where she lives is the back-haul of the mobile base station on top of the hill behind them.
But there is always money for more weapons
UK could get some money back if they actually cracked down on rich people / companies massive tax avoidance / evasion (tax laws need simplifying massively too to get rid of the massive amount of loopholes) instead of going after the (financially very small in comparison) issue of benefit fraud.
Could also renationalise vital services, as huge amount of cash for services that people need to pay for, is being sucked out of the country.
When gas, water, electricity etc. were publicly owned that money was recycled through the UK economy, whereas now a lot of that cash ends up outside the UK
.. and look at Thames Water as an example of what is legal, but shouldn't be, in terms of their loan / debt scam. Privatised utilities are just a licence to hold UK consumers to ransom* & **** the UK economy.
* Look at e.g. UK electricity prices and compare them to elsewhere - no sign of the supposed savings / efficiencies of privatization, so not seeing any of teh touted economic benefits (no surprise there as that was always a load of BS).
It’s a Euro make work program.
The only risk it can mitigate is commercial or political dependence on another company or country.
But any war-like or nature risk remains. A Euro sat can be shot down or zonked by a solar flare just as easily as anyone else’s.
China has looked at “resiliencey” and its dependencies, and built a nation wide eloran network. It now has independent PNT services that no one else can touch without invading, and no solar flare can destroy. Ok so that’s PNT and not comms but if you compare their eloran network to Europes Galileo, I know which one is better at meeting the actual requirements.
More fibre would be a better answer to the problem IRIS is supposedly solving.
That doesn’t mean “don’t build IRIS” but it does mean “don’t use IRIS as an excuse to dodge the real problem”.
The article specifically mentioned that it would provide services for Africa as well as Europe. Satellite also works where things like wildfires or landslips have destroyed fibre and power infrastructure, and in remote areas, fields, places people have evacuated too, or if there was a disaster at a music festival, etc. Emergency communications support and logistics vehicles in Australia include a starlink panel as one of the backhaul options.
"A UK minister has told Parliament that joining Europe's answer to Starlink — Elon Musk's satellite-based mobile internet service — would be a "stretch" given the nation's current financial challenges."
Excellent news. It sounds like government is starting to realise that there is a limit to how much they can spend. Obviously they are vastly late but hopefully this lesson can be passed on through the governments to get our finances in order. One can hope
Fibre is expected to be available to 97-98% of UK homes by 2030 and fiber invariably beats satellite delivery. Why does our Government feel a need to be involved in a satellite system that supports that niche 2-3% of homes in extremely rural location when including IRIS there are a dozen constellations planned, with Starlink, Kupier and OneWeb being the obvious options.
@bernmeister
"Why would the UK need an EU version of Starlink or even Starlink itself? Openreach and Virgin Media provision of fibre internet and others 5G internet is good . Am I missing something?"
Yes. Starmer is trying to get us back into the EU. Only when adding that does such 'investment' make sense.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
