2 ms·
I'm not asserting there is a link, I'm a step or two behind that, asserting that if we're going to consider any social change in the UK then it should be done i
by roenxi 3y ago
I'm not asserting there is a link, I'm a step or two behind that, asserting that if we're going to consider any social change in the UK then it should be done in light of what is probably the biggest influence on living standards.
In the UK we see an economy with, y'know, substantial debt. A lot of their alleged assets at the national level are US treasuries which are unreliable stores of wealth [0]. Their ability to secure energy just cratered by ~25% from peak.
That is some pretty dire context. Then we have the elites - who are aware of these factors - pushing through extremely heavy surveillance laws. Now it might be that surveillance is cheap these days, but nevertheless the policy disaster that they've engineered needs to be considered as a factor. In their position I'd certainly be tempted by a rats on the sinking ship mentality and the lure of flirting with totalitarianism.
[0] With China apparently selling off their debt the UK is trending towards being the 2nd largest holder of US debt. Which is a bit risky given the US is likely to engage the printing presses in a big way.
- pjc50 3y agohttps://www.macrotrends.net/2549/pound-dollar-exchange-rate-historical-chart https://www.macrotrends.net/2549/pound-dollar-exchange-rate-... The dollar holds its value better than the pound. US treasuries remain undefeated. > pushing through extremely heavy surveillance laws The thing is, none of this is new. We had extremely heavy surveillance in the 1980s (see Spycatcher, Zircon) and 1970s, back when British troops were murdering civilians on the streets of the UK. The UK surveillance industry always asks for more power. And it's consistently somewhat popular with the public. (aren't you an American?)
- roenxi 3y agoNo, Australian.