ℹ️ Not The Torygraph 💚 #SaveOurNHS #ScrapNHSBill

A mealy mouthed apology for poor timing, rather than poor judgement. Not remotely serious.

Neo-Nazi Alfie Coleman, who idolised Hitler has been found guilty of preparing a terrorist act He was active in a far-right chat, he drew up a kill list of Tesco colleagues he called race traitors for having non-white partners, & tried to buy a gun & ammunition from an MI5 agent

The Nazi-obsessed Alina Burns' attempted axe murder of a random person she thought was probably Muslim is at sentencing stage, has now been officially classified as Far Right Terrorism after the Crown Prosecution Service after judge clarified motives, today.

Pro-Palestinian demonstration in the heart of Jerusalem (brutally suppressed by Israeli police of course)

They got rattled by a van with a big screen saying, “Immigration Makes Britain Brilliant,” featuring the faces of people like Mo Farah and Dua Lipa.

First, “the markets” do not care whether the budget is “in balance” in the abstract. Bond pricing is not a moral referendum on fiscal tidiness. It reflects expected Bank Rate, expected inflation, term premia, liquidity conditions, regulatory demand, pension-fund behaviour, global portfolio preferences, collateral demand, and the expected path of nominal income. A government can run deficits for decades and still have low yields; it can also run a balanced budget and suffer a currency or banking crisis. The relevant question is not “is spending in balance?” but “what is the macroeconomic and institutional setting?” Second, you import a household-creditor model into a monetary-sovereign state. The UK government does not “borrow money” in the same sense that a firm or household does. It issues sterling liabilities: bank notes, reserves, NS&I savings bonds, Treasury bills, gilts within a sterling monetary system whose unit of account it defines. Gilt issuance is not the state rummaging around for money it lacks; it is a liability-management operation: exchanging one form of state liability for another. The risk on sterling gilts is therefore not ordinary insolvency risk, but interest-rate risk, inflation risk, duration risk, and political/institutional risk. Third, “creditors will assess whether they will get it back” is misleading in the UK case. Holders of gilts are not concerned that the UK will be technically unable to credit sterling to their accounts at maturity. They are worried about the real value of what they receive, future interest-rate paths, inflation, and whether they can sell the gilt at a reasonable price before maturity. A different argument. Fourth, the “markets punish imbalance” claim is selective history. The Liz Truss episode was not simply “the deficit was too large”; it was Bank Rate expectations, sterling weakness, and a forced-selling crisis in leveraged LDI pension strategies. It was not an eternal bond-market law saying “Left spending bad” or “Right tax cuts bad”; it was a specific market-structure and credibility shock. Fifth, the debt interest is also an income flow to the private sector: pension funds, insurers, banks, overseas holders, and households indirectly. It is not money fired into the sun. The distributional question matters: who receives it, and what else could have been done with the fiscal space? But describing it merely as the cost of “past debt” hides the fact that it is also current income for gilt holders and that the gilts etc will be inherited by future generations as a financial asset. Sixth, your comparison with education and defence needs care. It is a significant fiscal transfer, but your framing is designed to make the state appear like a maxed-out household credit card. A fallacy. In sum, the bond market is not a Victorian bank manager checking whether the household books are balanced. In a sterling system, gilts etc are state liabilities issued as part of monetary and reserve management. The real constraint is inflation and productive capacity, not whether the spreadsheet performs moral virtue.

This bizarre Leftist tendency to anthropomorphise the markets, to treat them as if they had preferences and prejudices. The bond markets don’t care whether you are Left or Right. They don’t even care whether your spending is high or low. All they care about is whether it is in balance. If you want to borrow money, creditors will assess whether they will get it back, and will ask a premium to lend to risky prospects. That premium means that Britain is now spending £110 billion a year on servicing past debt – more than on education, and twice as much as on defence.

Farage's company Thorn in the Side. Cash in bank 2023 -£291,328. I'm a Celebrity fee of £1.5m paid into bank 23/24. Cash in bank 2024 - £1,707,967. £1.4m house purchase May 2024. In 2025 cash in bank £1,967,406. Was not paid from I'm a Celebrity fee.