arthall

Is there actually any data to support this claim?

UBI has totally different reasons for existing, supposedly it will increase working conditions, workers' rights and pay by not making work a complete necessity.

"without the government underwriting at least a portion of the loan". If most of the loan isn't underwritten instantly, and instead will slowly be paid as another form of welfare, this locks the government into increasing benefits by a substantial percentage each year to account for the interest rate. I can't imagine the Tories being particularly up for that. This could cause major defaulting down the line, perhaps the Tories are expecting the next government to clean up this mess.

Argument won!

I stand corrected. Is the first quote in the report (“Sales volumes continued to see significant falls as the cost-of-living crunch squeezed consumer demand.") mistaken then? It doesn't tell you anything about sales volume.

202205_uk_rsm.pdf (brc.org.uk) Here you go.

Very true, I will try to get past this stupid account creation thing.

Sales Slump Further as Spending Squeeze Continues (brc.org.uk) Nothing of the sort was said in the actual report summary. It explicitly is measuring "sales volumes", ie. the number of goods sold, not the value.

Not "despite", because of. This is measuring sales volume, not revenues.

Ah yes, China's doing great at the moment.

I'm certainly not willing to "go without" because of a dispute in governance between two distant countries.

He's a puppet leader insofar as the Kremlin wouldn't allow this war if they didn't want it. The fact Tony Blair and George Bush weren't dictators is irrelevant to my argument.

The Kremlin as a whole. If this war was just Putin's idea, they'd have ousted him already or lied to him about doing it altogether. It is pure fantasy to think high ranking Russians aren't united in their desire for this invasion. Did we go to war in Iraq purely because George Bush and Tony Blair were insane and made a poor call? Or were there shared, initially secret motives for many people in our governments to start the war (control of oil, control of opium, maybe a slight security threat)?

Putin is a puppet leader. The invasion was entirely the Kremlin's decision, and they have reasons for it beyond "Putin is mental". The main reason was Ukraine justifiably wanting to join the EU, whereas Russia would rather have them in the Eurasian Customs Union. Obviously it is unjust to start a war over this, but at least it's in Russia's interests. NATO expansion is undeniably a factor as well (imagine if Mexico had a military alliance with China and Russia), and is a secondary, more fair reason for invading. To clarify, I don't support the invasion and obviously don't blame Ukraine.

Nuanced retort.