Best Of

J K Rowling giving Watson and Radcliffe an absolutely shoeing. Hilarious. And righteously deserved

Entitled pricks who turned on the writer that made them. Feck them

I think it's tragic. You can view Emma Watson's latest statements as an attempt to mend bridges and Joanne Rowling has chosen to respond with a tirade full of bitterness.

This is ridiculous, after years of siding with and encouraging groups that called for JKR's death/rape/imprisonment she's just decided that actually people can have their own opinions. She hasn't asked Rowling for forgiveness or even offered an apology to her for attempting to cancel Rowling for the past decade for the temerity of having a different opinion.

No, Rowling is absolutely right to spurn this rapprochement until Watson apologises for her behaviour and ingratitude towards the person who made her a millionaire. An apology for her previous attacks and behaviour would be a first step which clearly Watson is too arrogant to give.

No, what's ridiculous is to be quite so invested in the opinions of a couple of celebs.

Without JK Rowling my wife and two daughters would be facing a lifetime of men intruding into their private spaces such as changing rooms and public bathrooms. I will forever be thankful for her fight on this policy and winning the debate so that politicians and the law are now settled that biological reality matters more than someone's perversions or mental illness.

I’m warming to Reeves ! Her positive comments re an EU UK youth mobility scheme are welcome .

It wasn't as dire as I was expecting, although I am not sure it was enough for a party of government twenty five points behind RefCon in the polls.

The government need to get this new agreement with the EU done as fast as possible . The government needs every bit of growth it can find . And younger people screwed by Brexit get a chance to experience what life was like before the country decided to lose its mind .

My granddaughter spent the penultimate year of her degree course at Turin University in 2024

Erasmus should never have been thrown out with Brexit. Erasmus was more comprehensive than what is now in place.

The problem was that the EU tried what I call a FuckOffPrice - it was an absurd increase in price for continuing in Erasmus.

It's the economy (stupid), because it usually is. And there have been a couple of years now where wages have grown faster than prices. But as long as most people have more month than money, they are going to be understandably unhappy.

But to a very large degree, that's out of the government's hands to fix, in the short term anyway. We can shuffle how things are paid for, but they will largely cost what they cost.

One interesting suggestion that I've come across recently is that PCP car financing explains why people are angrier than ever about the cost of living even though wages have grown faster than prices, and even though the large number of new cars about would suggest a healthy level of prosperity.

It has enabled people to buy cars that they previously wouldn't have been able to afford - but really they still can't afford them, and so they're struggling to make ends meet because of the millstone of car finance.

I haven't interrogated the idea to see if the numbers stack up, but it suggests a way forward for the government to help square the circle. Increase regulation of car financing to save people from immiserating themselves spending beyond their means, and although this will mean more people have to make do with a lower status motor, they will end up happier when they can more easily reach the end of the month with the money previously being spent on finance for the car they couldn't afford.

I think there's a lot of truth in that and it holds more broadly, hence those articles in the Telegraph etc with headlines like "I earn a six figure salary but we are struggling". People assume a kind of entitlement to a certain kind of lifestyle and are then enraged when they can't afford it. I suppose that's just human nature, but it is accelerated by our hyper consumerist society and the advertising industry. It's better of course to aim for a lifestyle that is some way below your income and seek happiness and validation through things that don't cost much money, like spending time with family and friends or joining a local voluntary organization.

I am about to spend a day in London and I'm not takiung any cash with me.

Just the two grand phone, the ten grand watch, the fancy shoes and the sharp suit…

I am slumming it today, just the £1,500 watch, Watch Ultra 3 Hermès.

JohnO and myself are off to our regular working man’s venue for lunch, Claridge’s.

I never understood the joy in expensive watches. For any human purposes, my £5 Chinese watch is just as accurate as one 300 times the price. And if I lose it - which I do, frequently - it causes me only very minor vexation. I can wear it in a mosh pit, or in bed, or on the beach, or on a bike ride, without any anxiety whatsoever.

These are the worst government ratings until the next one.

I don't think so, they will still be the worst goverment ratings in 100 years time.

Just think, if you selected 30 people totally at random, how many would be shysters, fraudsters, liars and utter nincompoops and yet that is Starmer's Cabinet. Literally he could go to Euston Station and pick up 30 people from the next train to turn up and in all likelihood they would be less unsuited to being cabinet members than the ones he has chosen. That is how bad he is. But, he is evil as well of course.

He’s weak, inadequate, bureaucratic, self-serving, disloyal, inconstant, incompetent and mildly corrupt.

But not evil.

It doesn’t help to use emotional terms like that about political opponents

Edit: I forgot unprincipled and pusillanimous

Unhelpful as it is, the freedom to shout "Evil" at your opponents because nothing you say really matters is one of the few compensations of being in deep opposition.

And yes, socialist chums, government is harder than it looks, isn't it?

It’s still better for the discourse to refer to one’s political opponents as misguided rather than evil, even if your choice of language is unconstrained by law.

Government is always harder than opposition, as every new government quickly realises.

Yet there is a time when calling a government 'evil' might be apt. Hitler's regime, for instance. Or Stalin's. Or the Khmer Rouge. If Trump continues the way he is going, perhaps his.

Not this one though, not by a long shot. Leaderless, rudderless, incompetent; yes. But far, far from being evil. And neither were its predecessors.