Starmer's meeting with Trump was a success

Many people in the UK were anxious about prime minister Keir Starmer's meeting with US president Donald Trump today. With so much going on between Ukraine, a trade deal, tariffs and the Chagos islands, there is a lot to be concerned about.

Starmer's performance was, maybe surprisingly, quite good. It probably didn't hurt that the meeting with Trump started with a letter from His Majesty the King, inviting Trump for a second visit to the UK - an unprecedented invitation that Trump felt rather flattered to receive. The king surely deployed his soft power and it did seem to smooth things to a great start.

On his part, Starmer got most of what he came for. Trump made a somewhat vague claim about defending the British in Ukraine should peacekeeping forces be deployed - something which he however said would not be necessary. America's presence in the region to mine minerals will be enough to keep a lasting peace - or so the president believes. Starmer also cleverly balanced his stance on Russia with not directly confronting the US president, who recently called Zelensky a 'dictator'.

On trade, Starmer emphasised the strength of the relationship between the UK and the USA. Not only does the US have a little surplus with the UK, but both economies rank in the top two countries to invest in, top two countries for university, and have a tech sector bigger than one trillion dollars (the only two western countries to boast this). Perhaps most importantly, Trump said that a deal with the UK is being worked on "as we speak", and that a good deal that benefits both nations will be announced very soon. By the sound of it, the UK is well out of the president's firing line, who just yesterday threatened the EU with 25% tariffs. Another "Brexit dividend", then.

Lastly, when asked about Chagos Trump hinted at backing the deal.

We must be honest: Starmer performed very well on his first in-person meeting with the US president and both countries stand to benefit from a strong and thriving relationship.

The UK needs more, not less, austerity

First of all let me say that this is a hill I’m willing to die on. In fact, when I hit “publish” and Starmer’s thought police inevitably come knocking on my door, I will proudly tell them that I regret none of what I’m about to write. My goal with this article is to divide my readers into two groups: the ones who love austerity (most of you will fall into this category by the time I’m done brainwashing you) and the ones who never have, and never will, understand the intricacies of primary school maths. Let’s start with a definition: what is austerity? Austerity is a broad term used to refer to policies that reduce the deficit/debt of a country, either via spending cuts, increased taxation, or both. The objective is to drive the deficit (and ultimately the debt) down, something that can hardly be argued is a bad thing to do, especially in countries that face the challenges of a rapidly ageing population. Quick note for everyone: the deficit is the difference between what the state...

Italy’s love for the big state is a cultural remnant of fascism

Today we are going to make Italians mad. And no, we will not be breaking spaghetti – something that my Italian family has been doing for generations, no, centuries, before TikTok videos started circulating claiming that Italians don’t break spaghetti. We do, in fact, break our spaghetti, just like any sane person with a functioning brain would do when the spaghetti clearly doesn't fit into the pot. I actually used to sometimes not break my spaghetti, but now I always do so out of spite: it gives me both physical and emotional pleasure to know that the Italian gods are frowning upon my heartless breaking of spaghetti. As much as I would love to talk about how only people living in a hopeless country could get brutally angry about other people’s freedom to break spaghetti, and how this relates to Italy still being a fundamentally fascist-loving country at heart, the topic I suggest for today is the following: the link between Italians loving the big state and Italy having experienc...

The root cause of all American evils

TL;DR: it's the two-party system. Longer version: it's the two-party system. Yes, really. Full version: When Americans go to the supermarket, for every product they want to buy they are overwhelmed by choice. Cereals, tomato sauce, apples -- everything is available in all shapes and flavours, with multiple brands competing with each other and products coming from all over the world. I am writing this before the tariff-induced famine. When Americans go to the polls, it looks a little bit different. There are, realistically for most of the country, only two options. This is a problem because when choice is limited, quality isn't incentivised. Going back to the supermarket example, imagine that there are only two brands of cereals you can buy: well, that isn't really a lot of options, and you might very well end up buying the cereals that you "dislike the least" rather than the ones you "like the most". As if that was not bad enough, the only two brand...

Puzzlepolitics

Search This Blog