-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
Announcements
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
-
Latest posts...
-
66
Crime Fury Erupts After Foreigners Brutally Assault Local in Patong
Who do you want to be associated with then? To me personally you are associated with a kind of self -entitled cockroach. -
66
Crime Fury Erupts After Foreigners Brutally Assault Local in Patong
After they let somebody like you in - who else can be forbidden? Double-headed crocodile, maybe? -
691
The alarming mental decline of Donald J. Trump -- watch this space
He's still crying in his cornflakes that Hillary lost. -
6
Simplifying Thai Visas: The Issa Compass Advantage
well im not sure if you are another thaivisa thing or not 2 simple questions for you to make things easier for people to understand your purpose: 1) do you do visas or extend visas? a simple question yes or no please. 2) you say its a mobile app to advice the visa type to people regarding their situation. is it a free app? regarding to your answers i have some other questions or comments waiting for you. thank you -
370
‘Putin clearly won’: Pundits say meeting was ‘bad for Americans’
Pundits say meeting was ‘bad for Americans’ Only bad for the haters (democrats) who love war and the big military war complex grift. Trump OTOH, brings resolution.and peace solutions which most normal socially adjusted and balanced folks would prefer. -
1,587
Updates and events in the War in Ukraine 2025
The truth is that the British government hasn’t been honest about what the Ukraine war has really cost us. Prices have risen year after year, and the Exchequer is straining under the pressure. As a result, we are worse off, facing greater stress on housing and public services, while living in an increasingly febrile world where we’ve chosen to poke the Russian bear. And then there’s the fact that Ukraine could probably have muddled along under some pro-Russian oligarch, carrying on with business as usual and sparing a million or more lives. Instead, the United States chose to meddle after the Soviet collapse, pushing NATO to Russia’s borders and stoking the confrontation that has now exploded into all-out war. I've no time for Reform or the “stop the boats” mob on the right, but if they really wanted to examine the bills and understand the true threat to our living standards, they’d see it’s not some hapless refugee fleeing a country we ourselves helped to break decades ago. I’m no Putin shill or “useful idiot,” but a British citizen who still lives here and can see the fabric of society beginning to fray, while we’re told to fight battles on behalf of people we barely know in a country far away.A few years back, my brother’s family holidayed in Ukraine. They got chatting with their tour guide in Kyiv and, in passing, mentioned that I was married to a Thai woman. In typically blunt Slavic fashion, he expressed surprise that anyone would do such a thing. In fact, he quipped, “In our country we wouldn’t want a horse marrying a cow.” What’s clearly on the UK’s books Direct UK support to Ukraine (committed): Latest HMG factsheet: up to £21.8bn committed (about £13bn military, up to £5.3bn non-military, plus £3.5bn in export finance cover limits that are contingent). Note: commitments ≠ cash outturns, but this is the best top-line. (GOV.UK) What Parliament’s Library said slightly earlier (for context): By Jan 2025 the UK had pledged £12.8bn, of which £7.8bn was military (before later uplifts). (House of Commons Library) Replacing/drawing down UK stockpiles: NAO says kit given to Ukraine would cost about £2.7bn to replace (separate from how it was valued on MoD books). NAO also records £2.59bn of equipment supplied by Mar 2024 (procured/donated). (The Guardian, National Audit Office (NAO)) Refugees & resettlement (Homes for Ukraine and related): Central gov’t set council tariffs at £10,500 per person (arrivals before Jan 2023) then £5,900 (after), plus £350–£500 per month “thank-you” payments to hosts (now moving to £350 flat from Apr 2025). NAO said by Sept 2023 the gov’t had already provided £2.1bn for the scheme; that figure will be higher now, and there’s evidence of >£300m still unspent by councils in England. Order-of-magnitude today: ~£2–3bn. (GOV.UK, National Audit Office (NAO), The Guardian) The big swing factor: the UK’s energy-crisis response Total energy-support schemes (EPG, EBRS/EBSS, etc.): OBR’s March 2023 estimate: £78bn across 2022–23 and 2023–24. Subsequent outturn updates revised some components down (e.g., EBRS to £6.7bn in 2022–23 as prices fell), but the package remains enormous. The spike had multiple causes (post-COVID tightness and the invasion); ONS explicitly links the later surge to Russia’s war. (Office for Budget Responsibility, Office for National Statistics) Attribution caveat: There’s no official split of “what share was because of the Ukraine war versus other factors.” So the clean way to show the UK’s war-related cost is to present scenarios that attribute 0–100% of the energy-support bill to the war. Trade & economic frictions (counterfactual “normal relations”) UK goods imports from Russia were £10.3bn in 2021 (2.2% of total) and have since collapsed under sanctions (near-zero). That created substitution costs (especially for oil and some commodities), even if volumes were replaced from elsewhere. Hard to price precisely, so treat this as an opportunity-cost channel rather than a firm cash line. (Office for National Statistics) Putting it together (round-number scenarios) Below, I add: (A) direct Ukraine support actually on the books (use the £18.3bn that excludes purely contingent export-finance cover), (B) £2.7bn stockpile replacement, (C) £2–3bn for refugees so far, and (D) a share of the £78bn energy package. This yields orders of magnitude, not a single precise “bill.” Low attribution (25% of energy support due to the war): Energy £19.5bn + Direct support £18.3bn + Replacement £2.7bn + Refugees ~£2–3bn ⇒ ~£42–44bn. Mid attribution (50%): Energy £39bn + £18.3bn + £2.7bn + £2–3bn ⇒ ~£62–63bn. High attribution (100%): Energy £78bn + £18.3bn + £2.7bn + £2–3bn ⇒ ~£101–102bn. Notes: • Using the full £21.8bn commitment figure instead of £18.3bn (to include all commitments) would add ~£3.5bn to each scenario. (GOV.UK) • These totals exclude second-order macro effects (e.g., higher gilt interest costs from inflation/BoE hikes) and private-sector costs. They also exclude any future defence-spending uplifts to 2.5% of GDP by 2030 that are policy choices rather than past costs. (Institute for Government) Why this is the honest way to do it Energy is the dominant cost, but attribution is inherently uncertain; the OBR/ONS don’t publish a precise “% due to Ukraine.” So scenario analysis is more rigorous than pretending there’s one exact number. (Office for Budget Responsibility, Office for National Statistics) Direct fiscal lines (aid, stockpile replacement, refugee schemes) are documented and can be updated as new outturns appear. (GOV.UK, National Audit Office (NAO), The Guardian)
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
.thumb.jpg.bc523c85a8d558dbc282dca7a2e602c9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now