I think the covid excuse will work. HS2 spending was always planned but covid is an unexpected once in a 100 years freak event. HS2 is untouchable by Boris because it's seen as northern levelling up. It's not northern levelling up since they are likely to cancel much of the work in the north anyway and it seems pointless in the post-covid WFH age. But he is utterly clueless about what levelling up means and will stick with it.
As someone who lives in the North I’ve never thought as HS2 as any sort of reward. Firstly the timescale is ludicrous, the budget outrageous and the return is well frankly who knows. I used to travel regularly from Newcastle to Manchester in the early in the 2000s changing at York and the getting on the trans Pennine “express” One change and frequently standing from York to Newcastle on the return leg. They can’t even get quick routes east to West right. Where the hell is joined up serious future planning in this country. This bunch and I mean Tory and labour couldn’t level up a fucking shelf let alone a country.
HS2 will accelerate the decline of the North. Over time, economic activity collapses into a few concentrated regions. It doesn't spread out. Anything that assists the movement of people will contribute to this process, not impede it.
I don't particularly care if the Conservative Party rules for 20 years (actually this would be a bad outcome imo) and I don't care that much if he raises taxes as long as he does it proportionately but your analysis is fascinating as always, and surprisingly to me as a committed rejoiner, I'm starting to love your vision for how to change countries / governments more than I hate what you did with the EU.
Dominic, I’m still composing a response to your recent plea to Silicon Valley, but much of it is a request that give ‘Brexit’ the consideration it deserves and recognise that we’ve seen little positive to date and cannot allow the country to continue on it’s current trajectory (of creating further damage). You’ve highlighted that Conservatives need to take a stand before the party self destructs. Why not drive a discussion on what the UK needs to do, in order to deliver on the promises of Brexit. Solutions, not blame. And inclusive… I am/was a Conservative and wanted to remain. We’ve left, so my focus is on making Brexit a success - for the vast majority.
Haven’t read entire blog but in case you haven’t addressed, what do you recommend as alternative sources of funds?
If you mean this one then if you need find cash for social care he should save £ elsewhere not put up taxes. The problem is he wont cut anything, hence boxed into taax rises
Dominic, I read all your blogs and have some constructive criticism. It’s inclusive and quite detailed so I’d prefer to send this to you privately (vs commenting on each post), if possible.
Based on my personal, educational and professional experience, I have considerable knowledge/ understanding of most subjects you’ve covered to date (apart from politics). Even though I agree with your conceptual, big picture views, your actual rationale is often faulty or lacking in detail/ context/ nuance (IMHO). As such, you make some very misleading comments - which is probably counterproductive to your goal.
KK. I’ll try and post comments in response to relevant posts. Criticism always meant constructively. This was written for Lee Kwan Yew posts but summarised as it applicable here too.
You share many ideas/ concepts but I wish you would take your discussions to the level required to actually apply these. As things stand, I read a series of ‘views’ (though not always informed) but no follow through beyond that. Fine if that’s your only goal, but insufficient if you’re actually trying influence or drive change.
For example, offering solutions (such as the Singapore CPF approach to address UK’s social care problem) without considering viability / complexity or challenges is simplistic, misleading and adds little value. The CPF approach may be ideal, but is it a viable option- right now? If Government embraces approach, would public approve? Do you understand why what works in Singapore is not going to be easy to implement in the UK?
Singapore is a new country created by Lee Kwan Yew who was a benevolent dictator.
- Developed visionary, strategic policies, acted in the Country’s interests (not his own), delivered on commitments and drove Singapore to prosperity.
- At the same time, he did not tolerate opposition to his vision. The public had no say in the country’s future. They simply respected him and trusted he would make the right decision
The Government also played a very proactive role in creating a culture and value system that would work with policy. It was a methodical, targeted approach designed to instil values (such as: honesty; personal responsibility; community, societal contribution etc…) that are now so deeply ingrained across society. I lived in Singapore as a child, while LKY was PM. A few years and as an expat, but that was enough permanently ‘mould’ many views/ beliefs. Note that it was nothing sinister. Was mainly learning by example (daily interactions) and a positive reinforcement https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_2013-07-03_111150.html Point is that Singapore culture is primed for Singapore style policies.
Now, contrast this with the UK
- High tolerance for government corruption - no relationship or trust so people want a say, even when dealing with complex issues
- Prioritises individuals and civil liberties over population outcomes - intolerant of state excessive interference
- More of an ‘entitlement’ than ‘personal responsibility’ mentality
- Used to a welfare state
Someone took exception to comments LKY made about welfare and what these suggest. Fair, but truth is that most Singaporeans would likely consider being on welfare as shameful. Society takes pride in ‘earning’ rather than being ‘given’ something. When I lived there, taxi drivers refused to accept tips as they hadn’t earned the extra amount.
Bottom line, if you want to use Singapore as an example of good government, you need to recognise these differences and think through how to bridge the gap and implement the policies you believe would work. Fair?
I like your method of argument - very civilised - and as a result, your points come across well and move the debate forward. Kudos for that.
As regards the core issue, I realised last night that the starting point for any change here comes with enfranchisement. Put bluntly, whoever we vote for the government gets in.
Right now, most people I talk to are totally fed up with all the denizens of SW1 to the extent that for the first time in 30-50 years, they will not vote for either major Party, if at all!!! That's staggering because these are people who value democracy. Their view is "if my vote is ignored, what is the point?" "Why should I vote for political representation that is sub-standasdrd?" If a vote is meaningless and a mandate ignored, then nothing else follows.
Even though i think you make fair points, I think the British public very rapidly losing their tolerance for corruption, incompetence and self-interested politicians. The last time that happened, a King lost his head.
Right now, the approach of LKY seems an awful lot better value for money than this sham democracy we have.
And, I too have coverage across most of the subject matter here, including politics. IMHO the subjects are treated very discursively and would benefit from a framework on which ideas, rather than people, could be hung. And whilst I agree with a lot of views expressed here, there is a danger of the magpie effect obscuring what should be an evident strategy. One final point with apologies to Dominic who is a genius at many many things, technology isn't his strongest suit. I will, of course, happily take on the chin any ripostes he feels he ought to make.
I wrote this as part of a bigger response to highlight your final point regarding the need for a framework (vs creating magpie effect). If the aim is to influence, then ideas need to be more thematic. Moreover it’s important to take subjects through to actual application (which calls for deeper analysis and context). My point to Dominic was that if he wants to highlight Singapore as an example of good government, he should also discuss context and challenges to applying specific policies in the UK. That lays the groundwork for the next step, which is thinking through ways in we could adapt certain elements to fit our needs etc… Ideas alone can sound misleading simplistic, which is dangerous, IMO
Secondly, I completely agreed about enfranchisement. LKY was a ‘dictator’ but he didn’t rule by force/ threat/ submission. I’d argue the population chose to give him power because they trusted him to act in their interests. His policies were very fair. A subtle but important point (as I’ve seen work very well in private sector too) is related to ‘ownership’. Citizens were very proud of Singapore’s culture and achievement. As a result individual interests were broadly aligned with the Country’s interests. That matters when dealing with diverse populations as you can’t please everyone every time.
Thirdly, you’re probably right that people are losing tolerance. I was being a little extreme, just to make my point. I do wonder though, why there are no calls for accountability or transparency. Not heads being chopped off, but politicians being forced to deliver on commitments or explain themselves. A struggle for me given my experience in private sector, where there was no tolerance for underperformance. IMO (albeit simplistic) regardless of whether an organisation is run for profit or not, if you’re working on behalf of a population (or investors) and using their taxes (investments), you have a binding duty to them.
Fourthly, I personally would choose LKY’s approach over that of any other government I’ve encountered
Finally, I think I was hoping the blogs would lead to many more constructive, thoughtful debates, especially given the diversity of perspectives (mine is global and comes primarily from my private sector experience. I know absolutely nothing about politics and v v little about the public sector). I know (from experience) that in general, those that disagree with me usually force me to become smarter. I may end up with the same opinion, but I will always reevaluate my sources and assumptions.
Dominic - this isn’t a criticism. I’m fully aware that you’re writing a blog of ideas that interest you and I’m the one imposing my own expectations on you…
My apologies. I’d missed this and was reading comments made by others… Plus it has been a while since your first post- and when you made the pleas to Silicon Valley, it seemed you had moved on
“What does regime change mean and how could those sick of the closed party system and the closed civil service, which together control power and exclude almost everybody who could improve things, make a meaningful contribution to changing politics/government? We need practical projects where people can act instead of just talk — where they can contribute time, code, ideas, money, skills to build things of practical use, rather than just discussion.”
Your wise words are confirmation that we were duped into thinking that we'd elected a Conservative Government. I hope that many Tory MP's heed your advice, rebel and remove this mendacious, pathetic PM.
Good article Dom. What is your honest opinion on Sunak?
It seems obvious that he is the heir-apparent to this current government if Starmer and Johnson continues as they are. Is there anything behind the impressive and well oiled PR machine? I’ve read mixed opinions on this. But surely he is more competent and technically aware than current leader.
On the tax rises, as a young person who voted for BOJO in 2019 I can guarantee if this goes ahead I will NEVER vote for them again, same for many people I know. This would be a disgraceful resort to type by a party who just 2 years ago promised to at least pretend to address the dangerous inequalities that are pushing this country into socioeconomic collapse. Obviously we shouldn’t be surprised but I hope at least some MPs can hold them to account. Clearly, the party remains totally captured by elite financial/economic interests who have a paranoia towards taxation and prefer the poor to pay for major social issues.
RS is a serious person who reads papers, seeks smart people to listen to, works hard, behaves with personal integrity etc.
I think this is less of a 'party captured by elite' and more - hes boxed in, wont cut anything, has to find cash, has done some very simplistic polling which has spat out 'NI is best for NHS spending' - without any serious thought.
You can tell from crash of last fwe days the No10 team didnt have a serious plan and it's already unravelled
Rishi is a star - know people who work for him. But as yet, not politically tempered. A bit too much of a techie, although a techie with heart and potential
I find this slightly weird and inconsistent. Could you explain (given others may not understand this point either ) why are you so desperate to see this plan torpedoed, when in the same breath you say it will harm Johnson? For if we accept your version of Johnson as true (and I do) who cares if it harms him? It almost feels here in this post as if you are still passionately attached to the Tory party and want to be its saviour which is odd because you often say how much you loathe it . Also in this instance you are passionately advocating the same cause as its hard right like for example John Redwood who is also passionately against the plan but is that just coincidence?
Also I find the argument about it punishing young people hard to understand as they can expect to benefit themselves in due course and would be helped by not having to fund the care of their parents .
I think it would be bad for the country to do this plan - therefore I wd prefer it does not happen even though if it does happen it'll prove (i think) bad for BJ.
It's easy to overthink political calculations. I think BJ will be gone before too long because he's lost grip and doesnt have a clue what to do.
Id therefore prefer if in meantime he causes as little trouble as possible - & raising taxes on younger poorer workers now is bad IMO
Thanks Dom, a fair answer and I get it though am not sure myself it is as bad as you think it is. I do suspect too you are right about Boris on his way out. In that respect you might be mildly interested in the following predictions I made in print in the Daily Telegraph comments section on 6th October 2019 (so they can be proved to be predictions not hindsight as they are still there). I feel quite pleased I was able to distance myself from my own wishes which was not this at all as I certainly would never vote for Boris. My comments on your 'misdirection' still hold though from what you have told us I see I was wrong in one respect for you would have been happy with No deal!
Published DT comments 6 Oct 2019 2:30PM
"Reading the nuances and in particular paying close attention to Stephen Barclay, who gave a seriously revealing interview on Marr this AM , here is the likely future, one NOT based on wish-fulfilment, far from it.
1. Boris IS now ready to do a Deal and I think with a bit of push and shove he will get one , all the rest about barricading himself in is noise and bluster —Dom”s job is essentially misdirection and he is good at it., Boris knows he cannot afford no Deal OR extension.
2. There will be opponents of the deal from right and left but not enough, it will go through.
3. So we enter transition.
4. Boris will then on that basis win an election with a majority.
5. Corbyn will go.
6. Boris will find it harder to settle in than anticipated, there will be scandal and he may be forced to go before his term ends."
Great post Dom. You won’t remember me but we briefly overlapped at Business for Sterling when I was co editor of the brochure with the late Bill Jamieson.
Right on the nail and exactly the kind of leadership the thinking Brit is gasping for.
1) Increasing taxation (either directly or indirectly) would be putting a barrel in the revolver that faces the British economy but without the benefit of the single malt that usually accompanies it. Only John Redwood appears to grasp you cannot raise taxes when there is nothing to tax! The British economy has been mothballed for the last 2 years effectively thanks to Covid so what precisely are they going to tax?
2) Any sane business person or householder knows when money is scarce you cut your cloth. Why hasn't the Government done this? (Howls of rage from the left and the public sector) We voted for small government and deregulation and none of that has happened.
3) The word they will not utter is 'growth'. Every document that has emerged from the bowels of Whitehall in recent months is a confection of process and bureaucracy. Even the so-called Innovation Strategy I pointed you to contained NO concrete suggestions about how to grow the economy. Taxation would have many business owners and the lower paid reaching for the revolver to save them the trouble.
4) The Government does not raise funds through taxation. One of m' learned contributors on here can explain that. They should be gaining funds thro confidence in the economy. But, no growth, no confidence.
5) Boris made a promise. Breaking that would blow the relationship of trust between the Government and the people made at the last election.
What we want is less government; less regulation; less tax; simpler taxation a chance for the country and our nation of shopkeepers to do what it does best: enterprise. This can only come if the Government realises, like LKY, what conditions are required, and taxing those already under the cosh, to feed an overly bureaucratic and badly-managed bloater of an NHS, is not the way forward. The Government also needs to govern: to stop meddling in the everyday and concentrate on what is critical.
Natural conservatives can barely contain their incandescent rage at what is proposed. Regime change cannot come soon enough. This country is heading over the cliff. Handing a gift like this to Labour would make sure that Britannia would never rule the waves again, ever.
Probably too long and technical for most people to be bothered with but essentially it's an accounting proof that taxation is only a method of removing money from the hands of the private sector - it's not a means of funding government expenditure. Kinda changes a whole lot of conversations around pretty much every aspect of government given that most things that need doing are vetoed because 'costs too much!'. Sadly though most aren't interested. Oh well, where's that whisky you mentioned?
Flatlining economy since 2008 - look at interest rates, and especially the forward curve. Short term Brexit rows and Covid worstened any upward pressure. Expect a rough ride.
Triple lock seems a better target than NI to lots of pensions pros.
"Any sane business person or householder knows when money is scarce you cut your cloth.' That is not how Roosevelt and John Maynard Keynes saw it. A government is exactly NOT like a household.
Keynesian economic theory has consistently borne bitter fruit. It should be abandoned, the books publicly burned and legislation passed to mandate that the phrase "The Child Molester John Maynard Keynes" is used whenever his name is breathed.
Keynes was gay, yes. But neither he nor Oscar Wilde can possibly be called child molesters or paedophiles in the sense we understand it now, And anyway there is little intellectual point in trying to discredit his theories by slinging around mud. When Time magazine included Keynes among its Most Important People of the Century in 1999, it stated that "his radical idea that governments should spend money they don't have may have saved capitalism." The Economist has described Keynes as "Britain's most famous 20th-century economist." Of course we can disagree seriously with him, , some people like Milton Friedman did but they used argument not smear..
It is no surprise that the man who recommended that governments steal from generations as yet unborn also saw fit to steal innocence from those yet to pay a penny in tax.
So by stealing from “ generations yet unborn’ —you mean borrowing money? Like quantitive easing I guess? Some approve , some don’t, you would I assume prefer banks to go bust , something which would have a drastic effect on future generations and may be a tough position to defend. But either way it is nothing at all to do with being gay in another era and unsubstantiated gossip from a book about Bitcoin! There is no connection. I hope you would not make the same argument about Blair and. Brown and any other people who believe to a degree in Keynsian economics?
Banks absolutely should go bust. As we have seen from government intervention in healthcare, when Darwinian processes are interrupted, the quality of services rendered declines precipitously. There was very little regulation of banks in the UK until relatively recently and the government did not provide deposit insurance. As a consequence, banks conducted themselves in an extremely conservative fashion. Those who did not collapsed and justly so. You will note that the country did not catch fire each time a bank collapsed - and they did regularly. Permitting market forces to cull the irresponsible and foolhardy from banking is a public service, not a disaster. History has ample lessons that non-interventionism in this sphere is more stable over the long-term at the cost of higher volatility in the short-term. Finance is a meta-sphere that encompasses everything and the uncoupling of moral hazard has left banks to run amok with results that defy credulity.
Keynesian advocates are fools who believe the lie of "No more boom and bust"; that massively complex systems can be tamed and managed by an enlightened few. The constant, obvious failure of these interventions against the natural processes in play does not discourage them, so I regard Blair and Brown to be fools at best; and if not fools, then outright evil in their determination to plunder the future to fund today's pleasures.
Finally, far from being unsubstantiated gossip, The Child Molester John Maynard Keynes is damned by his own hand in letters to his friends advocating for child sex tourism in Tunis, Sicily and Egypt. I told you to read the footnotes.
Yup - I spent huge effort in 2020 with officials working on plans for growth, deregulation, planning, IP, foreign investment, all sorts - but with No10 just media entertainment service now zero momentum in Whitehall...
Hey buddy x love this one the most. Hope you think about making it free cause I think it’s very important. Thank you. I’ve copy and pasted three hundred words or so. https://t.me/dfgormley/23 If this isn’t cool or proper etiquette I’ll delete it in two seconds. x
I agree with everything you write about the Westminster bubble, media disincentives, government as an entertainment service etc. The phrase that then springs to mind is: a MASS CONSENSUAL HALLUCINATION. It's a phrase NYU Professor Scott Galloway uses often when writing about SPACs, Ivy League University tuition, Tesla, current bull market etc. And it seems the most fitting description of what we have in the UK today; a total denial that we need change / massive overhaul.
The challenge for change is how longstanding, ingrained and pervasive this consensual hallucination is. We have allowed these repetitive systems of thinking to go unchecked and solidify.
The emerging field of psychedelic medicine might offer a solution, however. Companies such as ATAI Life Sciences, Compass Pathways (UK based), and MindMed are working to have psychedelic molecules (e.g. psilocybin, LSD, MDMA, DMT) licensed as treatments for depression. 300 million+ are living, globally, with clinical depression; their condition cannot be helped by the current treatments (e.g. SSRIs). Psychedlic trials offer hope; the results so far suggest that for these 300 million, there is a different future. Check out the work Robin Carhart-Harris is doing at Imperial College London or roland Griffiths at John Hopkins for more insight. So far, only J&J have a licensed psych medicine on the market (Ketmaine for depression in the US).
With untreatable depression patterns of thought have been allowed, over time, to become ingrained, repetitively - like slay tracks on a icey mountain path. Psychedlics act like a fresh carpet of snow. As Michael Pollan says: "The brain is temporarily rewired. And that rewiring - whether the new connections actually produce the useful material or just shaking up the system - 'shaking the snow globe,' as one of the neuroscientists put it, is what's therapeutic. It is a reboot of the brain."
I read your call to the valley, but how do we dramatically break the hallucination and dramatically reboot Gov / media in the UK?
VL showed it possible. How do we go make sure it's long lasting this time?
Has he? He has justified his actions by saying he wanted to resolve a potential constitutional crisis, stop Corbin, and revolutionise government procurement; but none of these answer my point. Namely he helped make Boris PM.
I'm really confused about why this is a locked post, half of the content seems to be specifically tailored to advising MPs and cabinet members. I read in the Spectator that there are around 1500 subscribers to this substack. So I'd be really surprised if all the Tory MPs who should read this will have access as that would mean that over 20% of your subscribers would be Tory MPs, which is surely untrue.
Maybe this blog, Leo, is one of those new fangled and entangling Remote Social Services Hubs/Centres for you to get weighty matters preying on your mind, off your chest and cast out into the Streams of Open Source for Solutions Almost Practically Perfect for Final Resolutions on matters which constantly in the past defy and fail to deny Almighty Help and Virtual Assistance is now readily available.
If so, I’d be interested to see a ‘follow up’ section saying what MPs actually did, what was the measurable impact & how close it was to your predictions (like Tetlock).
He thinks only about himself & his appetites
I think the covid excuse will work. HS2 spending was always planned but covid is an unexpected once in a 100 years freak event. HS2 is untouchable by Boris because it's seen as northern levelling up. It's not northern levelling up since they are likely to cancel much of the work in the north anyway and it seems pointless in the post-covid WFH age. But he is utterly clueless about what levelling up means and will stick with it.
As someone who lives in the North I’ve never thought as HS2 as any sort of reward. Firstly the timescale is ludicrous, the budget outrageous and the return is well frankly who knows. I used to travel regularly from Newcastle to Manchester in the early in the 2000s changing at York and the getting on the trans Pennine “express” One change and frequently standing from York to Newcastle on the return leg. They can’t even get quick routes east to West right. Where the hell is joined up serious future planning in this country. This bunch and I mean Tory and labour couldn’t level up a fucking shelf let alone a country.
HS2 will accelerate the decline of the North. Over time, economic activity collapses into a few concentrated regions. It doesn't spread out. Anything that assists the movement of people will contribute to this process, not impede it.
HS2 is not seen in north as 'levelling up' - only by people in south who dont understand opinion in north.
He'll definitely stick with it
Great post! This is what I'm here for.
I don't particularly care if the Conservative Party rules for 20 years (actually this would be a bad outcome imo) and I don't care that much if he raises taxes as long as he does it proportionately but your analysis is fascinating as always, and surprisingly to me as a committed rejoiner, I'm starting to love your vision for how to change countries / governments more than I hate what you did with the EU.
But are any ministers and MPs reading?
Everything is quite absurd
Said Alice.
😊
Dominic, I’m still composing a response to your recent plea to Silicon Valley, but much of it is a request that give ‘Brexit’ the consideration it deserves and recognise that we’ve seen little positive to date and cannot allow the country to continue on it’s current trajectory (of creating further damage). You’ve highlighted that Conservatives need to take a stand before the party self destructs. Why not drive a discussion on what the UK needs to do, in order to deliver on the promises of Brexit. Solutions, not blame. And inclusive… I am/was a Conservative and wanted to remain. We’ve left, so my focus is on making Brexit a success - for the vast majority.
Haven’t read entire blog but in case you haven’t addressed, what do you recommend as alternative sources of funds?
Which blog are you referring to re funds?
If you mean this one then if you need find cash for social care he should save £ elsewhere not put up taxes. The problem is he wont cut anything, hence boxed into taax rises
Thanks. I was actually asking for thoughts on specific areas that he could cut - to reallocate.
Dominic, I read all your blogs and have some constructive criticism. It’s inclusive and quite detailed so I’d prefer to send this to you privately (vs commenting on each post), if possible.
Based on my personal, educational and professional experience, I have considerable knowledge/ understanding of most subjects you’ve covered to date (apart from politics). Even though I agree with your conceptual, big picture views, your actual rationale is often faulty or lacking in detail/ context/ nuance (IMHO). As such, you make some very misleading comments - which is probably counterproductive to your goal.
Let me know if you’d prefer public comments.
Public pls
KK. I’ll try and post comments in response to relevant posts. Criticism always meant constructively. This was written for Lee Kwan Yew posts but summarised as it applicable here too.
You share many ideas/ concepts but I wish you would take your discussions to the level required to actually apply these. As things stand, I read a series of ‘views’ (though not always informed) but no follow through beyond that. Fine if that’s your only goal, but insufficient if you’re actually trying influence or drive change.
For example, offering solutions (such as the Singapore CPF approach to address UK’s social care problem) without considering viability / complexity or challenges is simplistic, misleading and adds little value. The CPF approach may be ideal, but is it a viable option- right now? If Government embraces approach, would public approve? Do you understand why what works in Singapore is not going to be easy to implement in the UK?
Singapore is a new country created by Lee Kwan Yew who was a benevolent dictator.
- Developed visionary, strategic policies, acted in the Country’s interests (not his own), delivered on commitments and drove Singapore to prosperity.
- At the same time, he did not tolerate opposition to his vision. The public had no say in the country’s future. They simply respected him and trusted he would make the right decision
The Government also played a very proactive role in creating a culture and value system that would work with policy. It was a methodical, targeted approach designed to instil values (such as: honesty; personal responsibility; community, societal contribution etc…) that are now so deeply ingrained across society. I lived in Singapore as a child, while LKY was PM. A few years and as an expat, but that was enough permanently ‘mould’ many views/ beliefs. Note that it was nothing sinister. Was mainly learning by example (daily interactions) and a positive reinforcement https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_2013-07-03_111150.html Point is that Singapore culture is primed for Singapore style policies.
Now, contrast this with the UK
- High tolerance for government corruption - no relationship or trust so people want a say, even when dealing with complex issues
- Prioritises individuals and civil liberties over population outcomes - intolerant of state excessive interference
- More of an ‘entitlement’ than ‘personal responsibility’ mentality
- Used to a welfare state
Someone took exception to comments LKY made about welfare and what these suggest. Fair, but truth is that most Singaporeans would likely consider being on welfare as shameful. Society takes pride in ‘earning’ rather than being ‘given’ something. When I lived there, taxi drivers refused to accept tips as they hadn’t earned the extra amount.
Bottom line, if you want to use Singapore as an example of good government, you need to recognise these differences and think through how to bridge the gap and implement the policies you believe would work. Fair?
I like your method of argument - very civilised - and as a result, your points come across well and move the debate forward. Kudos for that.
As regards the core issue, I realised last night that the starting point for any change here comes with enfranchisement. Put bluntly, whoever we vote for the government gets in.
Right now, most people I talk to are totally fed up with all the denizens of SW1 to the extent that for the first time in 30-50 years, they will not vote for either major Party, if at all!!! That's staggering because these are people who value democracy. Their view is "if my vote is ignored, what is the point?" "Why should I vote for political representation that is sub-standasdrd?" If a vote is meaningless and a mandate ignored, then nothing else follows.
Even though i think you make fair points, I think the British public very rapidly losing their tolerance for corruption, incompetence and self-interested politicians. The last time that happened, a King lost his head.
Right now, the approach of LKY seems an awful lot better value for money than this sham democracy we have.
And, I too have coverage across most of the subject matter here, including politics. IMHO the subjects are treated very discursively and would benefit from a framework on which ideas, rather than people, could be hung. And whilst I agree with a lot of views expressed here, there is a danger of the magpie effect obscuring what should be an evident strategy. One final point with apologies to Dominic who is a genius at many many things, technology isn't his strongest suit. I will, of course, happily take on the chin any ripostes he feels he ought to make.
Thank you and appreciate your views and feedback.
I wrote this as part of a bigger response to highlight your final point regarding the need for a framework (vs creating magpie effect). If the aim is to influence, then ideas need to be more thematic. Moreover it’s important to take subjects through to actual application (which calls for deeper analysis and context). My point to Dominic was that if he wants to highlight Singapore as an example of good government, he should also discuss context and challenges to applying specific policies in the UK. That lays the groundwork for the next step, which is thinking through ways in we could adapt certain elements to fit our needs etc… Ideas alone can sound misleading simplistic, which is dangerous, IMO
Secondly, I completely agreed about enfranchisement. LKY was a ‘dictator’ but he didn’t rule by force/ threat/ submission. I’d argue the population chose to give him power because they trusted him to act in their interests. His policies were very fair. A subtle but important point (as I’ve seen work very well in private sector too) is related to ‘ownership’. Citizens were very proud of Singapore’s culture and achievement. As a result individual interests were broadly aligned with the Country’s interests. That matters when dealing with diverse populations as you can’t please everyone every time.
Thirdly, you’re probably right that people are losing tolerance. I was being a little extreme, just to make my point. I do wonder though, why there are no calls for accountability or transparency. Not heads being chopped off, but politicians being forced to deliver on commitments or explain themselves. A struggle for me given my experience in private sector, where there was no tolerance for underperformance. IMO (albeit simplistic) regardless of whether an organisation is run for profit or not, if you’re working on behalf of a population (or investors) and using their taxes (investments), you have a binding duty to them.
Fourthly, I personally would choose LKY’s approach over that of any other government I’ve encountered
Finally, I think I was hoping the blogs would lead to many more constructive, thoughtful debates, especially given the diversity of perspectives (mine is global and comes primarily from my private sector experience. I know absolutely nothing about politics and v v little about the public sector). I know (from experience) that in general, those that disagree with me usually force me to become smarter. I may end up with the same opinion, but I will always reevaluate my sources and assumptions.
Dominic - this isn’t a criticism. I’m fully aware that you’re writing a blog of ideas that interest you and I’m the one imposing my own expectations on you…
My apologies. I’d missed this and was reading comments made by others… Plus it has been a while since your first post- and when you made the pleas to Silicon Valley, it seemed you had moved on
“What does regime change mean and how could those sick of the closed party system and the closed civil service, which together control power and exclude almost everybody who could improve things, make a meaningful contribution to changing politics/government? We need practical projects where people can act instead of just talk — where they can contribute time, code, ideas, money, skills to build things of practical use, rather than just discussion.”
Your wise words are confirmation that we were duped into thinking that we'd elected a Conservative Government. I hope that many Tory MP's heed your advice, rebel and remove this mendacious, pathetic PM.
Good article Dom. What is your honest opinion on Sunak?
It seems obvious that he is the heir-apparent to this current government if Starmer and Johnson continues as they are. Is there anything behind the impressive and well oiled PR machine? I’ve read mixed opinions on this. But surely he is more competent and technically aware than current leader.
On the tax rises, as a young person who voted for BOJO in 2019 I can guarantee if this goes ahead I will NEVER vote for them again, same for many people I know. This would be a disgraceful resort to type by a party who just 2 years ago promised to at least pretend to address the dangerous inequalities that are pushing this country into socioeconomic collapse. Obviously we shouldn’t be surprised but I hope at least some MPs can hold them to account. Clearly, the party remains totally captured by elite financial/economic interests who have a paranoia towards taxation and prefer the poor to pay for major social issues.
RS is a serious person who reads papers, seeks smart people to listen to, works hard, behaves with personal integrity etc.
I think this is less of a 'party captured by elite' and more - hes boxed in, wont cut anything, has to find cash, has done some very simplistic polling which has spat out 'NI is best for NHS spending' - without any serious thought.
You can tell from crash of last fwe days the No10 team didnt have a serious plan and it's already unravelled
Rishi is a star - know people who work for him. But as yet, not politically tempered. A bit too much of a techie, although a techie with heart and potential
I find this slightly weird and inconsistent. Could you explain (given others may not understand this point either ) why are you so desperate to see this plan torpedoed, when in the same breath you say it will harm Johnson? For if we accept your version of Johnson as true (and I do) who cares if it harms him? It almost feels here in this post as if you are still passionately attached to the Tory party and want to be its saviour which is odd because you often say how much you loathe it . Also in this instance you are passionately advocating the same cause as its hard right like for example John Redwood who is also passionately against the plan but is that just coincidence?
Also I find the argument about it punishing young people hard to understand as they can expect to benefit themselves in due course and would be helped by not having to fund the care of their parents .
I think it would be bad for the country to do this plan - therefore I wd prefer it does not happen even though if it does happen it'll prove (i think) bad for BJ.
It's easy to overthink political calculations. I think BJ will be gone before too long because he's lost grip and doesnt have a clue what to do.
Id therefore prefer if in meantime he causes as little trouble as possible - & raising taxes on younger poorer workers now is bad IMO
Thanks Dom, a fair answer and I get it though am not sure myself it is as bad as you think it is. I do suspect too you are right about Boris on his way out. In that respect you might be mildly interested in the following predictions I made in print in the Daily Telegraph comments section on 6th October 2019 (so they can be proved to be predictions not hindsight as they are still there). I feel quite pleased I was able to distance myself from my own wishes which was not this at all as I certainly would never vote for Boris. My comments on your 'misdirection' still hold though from what you have told us I see I was wrong in one respect for you would have been happy with No deal!
Published DT comments 6 Oct 2019 2:30PM
"Reading the nuances and in particular paying close attention to Stephen Barclay, who gave a seriously revealing interview on Marr this AM , here is the likely future, one NOT based on wish-fulfilment, far from it.
1. Boris IS now ready to do a Deal and I think with a bit of push and shove he will get one , all the rest about barricading himself in is noise and bluster —Dom”s job is essentially misdirection and he is good at it., Boris knows he cannot afford no Deal OR extension.
2. There will be opponents of the deal from right and left but not enough, it will go through.
3. So we enter transition.
4. Boris will then on that basis win an election with a majority.
5. Corbyn will go.
6. Boris will find it harder to settle in than anticipated, there will be scandal and he may be forced to go before his term ends."
So 5/6 so far!
Great post Dom. You won’t remember me but we briefly overlapped at Business for Sterling when I was co editor of the brochure with the late Bill Jamieson.
Aha!
Right on the nail and exactly the kind of leadership the thinking Brit is gasping for.
1) Increasing taxation (either directly or indirectly) would be putting a barrel in the revolver that faces the British economy but without the benefit of the single malt that usually accompanies it. Only John Redwood appears to grasp you cannot raise taxes when there is nothing to tax! The British economy has been mothballed for the last 2 years effectively thanks to Covid so what precisely are they going to tax?
2) Any sane business person or householder knows when money is scarce you cut your cloth. Why hasn't the Government done this? (Howls of rage from the left and the public sector) We voted for small government and deregulation and none of that has happened.
3) The word they will not utter is 'growth'. Every document that has emerged from the bowels of Whitehall in recent months is a confection of process and bureaucracy. Even the so-called Innovation Strategy I pointed you to contained NO concrete suggestions about how to grow the economy. Taxation would have many business owners and the lower paid reaching for the revolver to save them the trouble.
4) The Government does not raise funds through taxation. One of m' learned contributors on here can explain that. They should be gaining funds thro confidence in the economy. But, no growth, no confidence.
5) Boris made a promise. Breaking that would blow the relationship of trust between the Government and the people made at the last election.
What we want is less government; less regulation; less tax; simpler taxation a chance for the country and our nation of shopkeepers to do what it does best: enterprise. This can only come if the Government realises, like LKY, what conditions are required, and taxing those already under the cosh, to feed an overly bureaucratic and badly-managed bloater of an NHS, is not the way forward. The Government also needs to govern: to stop meddling in the everyday and concentrate on what is critical.
Natural conservatives can barely contain their incandescent rage at what is proposed. Regime change cannot come soon enough. This country is heading over the cliff. Handing a gift like this to Labour would make sure that Britannia would never rule the waves again, ever.
Dangerous talk there Suzanne, we wouldn't want people finding out that taxation does not fund expenditure would we?
https://gimms.org.uk/2021/02/21/an-accounting-model-of-the-uk-exchequer/
Probably too long and technical for most people to be bothered with but essentially it's an accounting proof that taxation is only a method of removing money from the hands of the private sector - it's not a means of funding government expenditure. Kinda changes a whole lot of conversations around pretty much every aspect of government given that most things that need doing are vetoed because 'costs too much!'. Sadly though most aren't interested. Oh well, where's that whisky you mentioned?
Flatlining economy since 2008 - look at interest rates, and especially the forward curve. Short term Brexit rows and Covid worstened any upward pressure. Expect a rough ride.
Triple lock seems a better target than NI to lots of pensions pros.
"Any sane business person or householder knows when money is scarce you cut your cloth.' That is not how Roosevelt and John Maynard Keynes saw it. A government is exactly NOT like a household.
I did not say it was, and my point was applicable generally to anyone who has a budget to manage, to live or work within their means.
Keynesian economic theory has consistently borne bitter fruit. It should be abandoned, the books publicly burned and legislation passed to mandate that the phrase "The Child Molester John Maynard Keynes" is used whenever his name is breathed.
Keynes was gay, yes. But neither he nor Oscar Wilde can possibly be called child molesters or paedophiles in the sense we understand it now, And anyway there is little intellectual point in trying to discredit his theories by slinging around mud. When Time magazine included Keynes among its Most Important People of the Century in 1999, it stated that "his radical idea that governments should spend money they don't have may have saved capitalism." The Economist has described Keynes as "Britain's most famous 20th-century economist." Of course we can disagree seriously with him, , some people like Milton Friedman did but they used argument not smear..
It is no surprise that the man who recommended that governments steal from generations as yet unborn also saw fit to steal innocence from those yet to pay a penny in tax.
Be sure to read the footnotes.
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/exposed-economist-reveals-that-john-maynard-keynes-was-a-pedophile/
Torrjust now
So by stealing from “ generations yet unborn’ —you mean borrowing money? Like quantitive easing I guess? Some approve , some don’t, you would I assume prefer banks to go bust , something which would have a drastic effect on future generations and may be a tough position to defend. But either way it is nothing at all to do with being gay in another era and unsubstantiated gossip from a book about Bitcoin! There is no connection. I hope you would not make the same argument about Blair and. Brown and any other people who believe to a degree in Keynsian economics?
ReplyDelete
Banks absolutely should go bust. As we have seen from government intervention in healthcare, when Darwinian processes are interrupted, the quality of services rendered declines precipitously. There was very little regulation of banks in the UK until relatively recently and the government did not provide deposit insurance. As a consequence, banks conducted themselves in an extremely conservative fashion. Those who did not collapsed and justly so. You will note that the country did not catch fire each time a bank collapsed - and they did regularly. Permitting market forces to cull the irresponsible and foolhardy from banking is a public service, not a disaster. History has ample lessons that non-interventionism in this sphere is more stable over the long-term at the cost of higher volatility in the short-term. Finance is a meta-sphere that encompasses everything and the uncoupling of moral hazard has left banks to run amok with results that defy credulity.
Keynesian advocates are fools who believe the lie of "No more boom and bust"; that massively complex systems can be tamed and managed by an enlightened few. The constant, obvious failure of these interventions against the natural processes in play does not discourage them, so I regard Blair and Brown to be fools at best; and if not fools, then outright evil in their determination to plunder the future to fund today's pleasures.
Finally, far from being unsubstantiated gossip, The Child Molester John Maynard Keynes is damned by his own hand in letters to his friends advocating for child sex tourism in Tunis, Sicily and Egypt. I told you to read the footnotes.
Yup - I spent huge effort in 2020 with officials working on plans for growth, deregulation, planning, IP, foreign investment, all sorts - but with No10 just media entertainment service now zero momentum in Whitehall...
I wonder what will happen when the music stops...?
Hey buddy x love this one the most. Hope you think about making it free cause I think it’s very important. Thank you. I’ve copy and pasted three hundred words or so. https://t.me/dfgormley/23 If this isn’t cool or proper etiquette I’ll delete it in two seconds. x
I agree with everything you write about the Westminster bubble, media disincentives, government as an entertainment service etc. The phrase that then springs to mind is: a MASS CONSENSUAL HALLUCINATION. It's a phrase NYU Professor Scott Galloway uses often when writing about SPACs, Ivy League University tuition, Tesla, current bull market etc. And it seems the most fitting description of what we have in the UK today; a total denial that we need change / massive overhaul.
The challenge for change is how longstanding, ingrained and pervasive this consensual hallucination is. We have allowed these repetitive systems of thinking to go unchecked and solidify.
The emerging field of psychedelic medicine might offer a solution, however. Companies such as ATAI Life Sciences, Compass Pathways (UK based), and MindMed are working to have psychedelic molecules (e.g. psilocybin, LSD, MDMA, DMT) licensed as treatments for depression. 300 million+ are living, globally, with clinical depression; their condition cannot be helped by the current treatments (e.g. SSRIs). Psychedlic trials offer hope; the results so far suggest that for these 300 million, there is a different future. Check out the work Robin Carhart-Harris is doing at Imperial College London or roland Griffiths at John Hopkins for more insight. So far, only J&J have a licensed psych medicine on the market (Ketmaine for depression in the US).
With untreatable depression patterns of thought have been allowed, over time, to become ingrained, repetitively - like slay tracks on a icey mountain path. Psychedlics act like a fresh carpet of snow. As Michael Pollan says: "The brain is temporarily rewired. And that rewiring - whether the new connections actually produce the useful material or just shaking up the system - 'shaking the snow globe,' as one of the neuroscientists put it, is what's therapeutic. It is a reboot of the brain."
I read your call to the valley, but how do we dramatically break the hallucination and dramatically reboot Gov / media in the UK?
VL showed it possible. How do we go make sure it's long lasting this time?
You are as responsible as anyone for getting this man into No 10. Please tell us whether you ever think ‘ Oh God, what did I do’
I think he’s address this a good few times. x
Has he? He has justified his actions by saying he wanted to resolve a potential constitutional crisis, stop Corbin, and revolutionise government procurement; but none of these answer my point. Namely he helped make Boris PM.
Ive explained here
https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/why-i-went-to-no10-in-summer-2019
Great post. Time for the Tory Cabinet Ministers to start asking BJ some tough questions. The leadership vacuum at the top cannot be sustained.
I'm really confused about why this is a locked post, half of the content seems to be specifically tailored to advising MPs and cabinet members. I read in the Spectator that there are around 1500 subscribers to this substack. So I'd be really surprised if all the Tory MPs who should read this will have access as that would mean that over 20% of your subscribers would be Tory MPs, which is surely untrue.
Maybe this blog, Leo, is one of those new fangled and entangling Remote Social Services Hubs/Centres for you to get weighty matters preying on your mind, off your chest and cast out into the Streams of Open Source for Solutions Almost Practically Perfect for Final Resolutions on matters which constantly in the past defy and fail to deny Almighty Help and Virtual Assistance is now readily available.
Ill put unlocked version out but part of point of this blog is to post stuff for subscribers, see responses, tweak then put some stuff public
If so, I’d be interested to see a ‘follow up’ section saying what MPs actually did, what was the measurable impact & how close it was to your predictions (like Tetlock).
Good answer and it's why we're here.
Makes sense thanks
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/social-care-funding-complex-but-not-impossible#raising-capital-floor-means-test-threshold
Very interesting