3 Responses to “Image – The Economist Never Fails to Play a Leading Role – Their Current Cover Photo”

  1. Mick says:

    I think this is all geared to put that plank Starmer into power, and I suspect Truss may be a willing part of the theatre. Her payoff now that she made it to PM is to receive a lifetime stipend after leaving Downing Street, then a bit later on she’ll be ennobled. Maybe she’s thick-skinned enough to shrug off the abuse she’ll take for making Starmer look electable.

    I don’t think he’d win the popular vote, and unlike Blair who actually had to get the votes required to take office, the elite have captured the election process and only need now to give the appearance Starmer was the people’s choice and not theirs. I think like Blair he’ll introduce some very authoritarian policies the Tories might not get away with easily, but as he’s fresh the call will be to “Give him a chance” etc. After doing his damage to our freedoms many will call for the Tories to come back. I think that’s the plan.

  2. Mick says:

    I think Starmer’s primary role will be to attack the welfare state, and he’ll be so brutal it will change not only the welfare state but also the employment state of the unskilled in Britain. And by unskilled that doesn’t mean you can’t do anything; because when the fishing industry was closed down those skilled mariners were classed as unskilled, even though they retained their skills and it was their industry that was gone.

    I suspect the unemployed will be forced to work full time for their dole. (If there’s work for them to do why aren’t they fully employed to do it?) What will happen is many unscrupulous employers will take on “doleys” only; and some doleys will work full time for the rest of their lives while never being employed again, nor getting benefits like holiday and sick pay. It will be a whole new strata of forced labour. That’s what I think Starmer and Reeves will do – and their boast will be they “got the economy moving” and “more people in work” and “British business has become competitive again” etc. So if you become unemployed after Starmer’s PM, be prepared to work like a horse for the rest of your days while never having a job again.

  3. Ander1991 says:

    I suppose I’m just a humourless git who can’t see the invisible ‘satire’ html coding but for those who were wondering, ostensibly the real Economist cover can be found here:
    https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/archive

    – while over here is an inside article with the Truss-rod (gave Queenie a stiff neck) and Kwasimodo montage:
    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/09/28/how-not-to-run-a-country

    Anyone being canvassed by Labourites (or any other faction of the Uniparty for that matter) might ask why they should vote for a party whose leader can’t or won’t define “woman”. (“How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?”) Instead the voter should say they won’t vote for any candidate who will not give a clear unconditional commitment to stamp out so-called child grooming by Muslim gangs or anybody else for that matter. Child sex is statutory rape and NOT a “lifestyle choice”. Police – nb.