Some absolutely wild takes out there in response to our Covid vs flu story.
Increasingly looks like for a vocal minority of people, talking about Covid has entered religious purity test territory.
We've known since Jan that Covid IFR was closing in on flu, so it crossing the line is barely new.
What we spent a week demonstrating is that Covid is still adding to mortality risk above and beyond a bad flu season.
Yet a lot of responses essentially say "thou shalt not mention the fact that Covid has become less lethal ⛪, even if you're the first people to show that it's still adding risk". Anyway, it's always good to know which people are interested in forming an evidence-based understanding of the world, and which are more interested in maintaining and policing a rigid belief system
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
It's a marvellous piece of music.
Tchaikovsky didn't think so
You shouldn't accept the artist's claim that his work is crap any more than you should accept his claim that it is absolutely brilliant.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
Only question is what the Belarussian troops who don't want to be there will do. Lay down their arms or jump sides?
Rape and looting spree to make the trip worthwhile. Whatever happens now Ukraine is finished as a viable state; possibly forever.
I am not so sure. It looks to me that Ukraine is developing an ever stronger national consciousness. There will be a lot of international support for rebuilding it, and liberating the rest.
Of course we ignore that Ukranian oligarchs are no angels either.
Though the majority of them were Putin supporters.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
It's a marvellous piece of music.
Tchaikovsky didn't think so
You shouldn't accept the artist's claim that his work is crap any more than you should accept his claim that it is absolutely brilliant.
Only question is what the Belarussian troops who don't want to be there will do. Lay down their arms or jump sides?
Rape and looting spree to make the trip worthwhile. Whatever happens now Ukraine is finished as a viable state; possibly forever.
I am not so sure. It looks to me that Ukraine is developing an ever stronger national consciousness. There will be a lot of international support for rebuilding it, and liberating the rest.
Of course we ignore that Ukranian oligarchs are no angels either.
It's not in the west's interests to have a decisive victory one way or the other. They'd prefer for this to drag on for years bleeding Russia out gradually rather than risk upending the whole chessboard.
The US, UK, etc also have to carefully calibrate the amount and type of weapons they put in to Ukraine as at least some of them are going to end being sold on the black market or in Russian hands. As a complete Javelin plus CLU already have.
It needs to be local. The point of community sponsorship is that the family is welcomed into and supported by the local community. We are part of a volunteer group who have fundraised and applied via the Home Office to welcome a family, there is huge support locally, the only difficulty is finding affordable accommodation, ie a landlord willing to forego most of the rental yield on their property. My wife and I have decided that we may have to be those landlords. We are lucky to be in a financial position to do that. But the ethics of the situation certainly aren't clear-cut, a reason why we have steered clear of becoming buy to let landlords up to now.
It sounds great. And I don't think you should have ethical qualms even if later you become a straightforward BTL landlord. MaxPB will disapprove, but there is a real need for rental homes with decent landlords.
It is not just Max, most people under 40 will disagree with encouraging more BTL.
The problem with the whole "BTL is evil" thing is that it is missing the point. The BTL aren't stealing the housing and shipping it to China or Russia. The problem is that there aren't enough properties for the number of people in the country.
I tried explaining the housing shortage to relatives from Peru - it took a lot of convincing before they would believe me on the policies here.
That assumes renting and buying give similar experiences. They don't. Especially with the UK laws, although many of them have improved a touch over the last decade.
It is not just a question of number of homes, but a question of who owns them as well.
Who owns them only matters if the quantity of homes is fixed.
Unfix the quantity and let people build as many homes as people want to buy and who owns them ceases to matter. Any bad landlords would find themselves owning unoccupied houses that they're forced to pay taxes on because they can't find tenants - while people who want their own homes would be able to just go to the market and get one.
Halting construction gives power to bad landlords because their homes are still "needed" rather than being able to be circumvented and empty.
If people know they are in a home for the next 10-20 years they can act very differently to if they know their contract is for 6 months.
All of this is true - but it comes back to property shortages. If the number of properties matches or exceeds demand, prices will fall rapidly. Both rental and for purchase.
Currently, the market clears at what people can *afford to pay*. So every increase in wealth goes to feed The Beast.
Hence people spending £1 million pounds on a terraced house built by a Victorian brickworks as cheap company accommodation for the labourers at the brickworks....
These are not immovable beasts. Tax second homes more and landlords can afford to pay less relative to wannabee homeowners. That is a desirable outcome for society, just not the part of society that votes for the establishment party in power. It really is not rocket science.
Second homes are not the overall cause of the housing crisis - though they have profound effects in certain localities.
The reason why second homes, more brown field, unoccupied flats owned by Evul Furriners etc are such popular "solutions" is that they avoid dealing with the actual issue.
I meant second homes as in people who own more than one home including landlords, rather than solely your seaside cottage types.
If you don't increase the number of properties, just shifting from rental to ownership won't do much for affordability.
As my mother put it - you are either paying your own mortgage or someone else's.
If owning more than one residential was prohibited prices would likely fall and find a new lower equilibrium.
That would only work if the people previously renting didn't enter the home ownership market - which they will have to, if there are less properties for rental.
The equation is simple
Rental + Ownership > Supply
It would work to bring prices down because it would (net) subtract from the demand side as regards financial firepower.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
That's a bit unfair when you read why the Philharmonic has chosen to change the music.
2 bits are military and a member of the orchestra has a connection with the Ukraine.
Heck the only politician talking about it seems to be a Mr Nigel Farage...
I read the justification & I don't really think it makes much sense.
I mean, the replacement is Elgar.
I could just as easily object to Elgar on the grounds of personification of the glories of Imperial England. Particularly inappropriate in Wales.
Imperial Great Britain actually, and are you seriously claiming colonial status for Wales?
Imperial England, actually. Elgar is quintessentially English. Here's Sibelius on Elgar : "the personification of the true English character in music ... a noble personality and a born aristocrat"
And, of course, Wales is a colony.
It is run for the benefit of the English. But you know that.
So what does England actually get out of it?
Elgar has almost nothing to do with it, the words were retrofitted to the music by A C Benson
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
With a sensible "unofficial" pact between Lib Dems and Labour in 2024, the Tories are going to have a load of problems. I think laying Tory majority seems a good bet
The value bet is, I think, Labour most seats ?
I think so. I have the opposite position - Con most seats @ 1.6 - and wish I didn't.
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion. https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
Endless sprawling suburbia is the British (and Australasian) way. People want houses, and a patch of garden, even if tiny. At least that is the case outside London.
Partly it is the poor construction and environment of many British flats, of which the cladding issue is just one of many.
Sorry - that's an absurd comparison. These are the local authorities they think are part of "Greater Nottingham": Gedling, Nottingham, Broxtowe, Erewash (!).
And they have left out the Southern end of Ashfield, which arguably *is* becoming part of Greater Nottingham.
They aren't even paying much attention to the coverage Nottingham's metropolitan area public transport system.
Why are they saying that Erewash in Derbyshire is part of Greater Nottingham?
Adds:
And the southern boundary taken appears to be the Trent, which leaves 50k people in West Bridgford who live within about 1-2m of Nottingham's Market Square, Trent Bridge Cricket Ground *and* Nottingham Forest football ground OUTSIDE Greater Nottingham.
Dumbo dumbo dumbo.
(Apols for my bluntness, but that is self-satirical)
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
Hire John Williams to write the "Javelin Symphony".....
FWIW the Cardiff Philharmonic decision makes sense. They're a bunch of amateurs who probably feel pretty uncomfortable performing bombastic Russian victory songs interspersed with cannons as Russia is conducting a military genocide a few hundred miles away.
They're not cancelling due to outside pressure, but rather due to personal discomfort.
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion. https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
FWIW the Cardiff Philharmonic decision makes sense. They're a bunch of amateurs who probably feel pretty uncomfortable performing bombastic Russian victory songs interspersed with cannons as Russia is conducting a military genocide.
They're cancelling due to outside pressure, but rather due to personal discomfort.
This seems small beer compared to everything else going on at the moment. If they don't want to do it, it's their choice.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
You could ban them on grounds of artistic merit in most cases. Great works about war by the likes of homer and Tolstoy do anything but glorify it.
I have never known so much hatred as I have received in recent days from Chelsea fans over the sanctioning of Putin’s long-term mate Roman Abramovich. Sorry, but Abramovich washed his dirty money clean through sport."
A question: it look stinky, but is Abramovich's money actually 'dirty', as in illegal? Morality and money are a very different question...
Abramovich made his money buying shares in Russian companies in the 1990s.
A simple version is that when the Soviet Union collapsed, everyone in Russia was given vouchers to buy shares in the major state companies that were being floated. Abramovich had a large team of people in Russia go around and buy up the vouchers from ordinary people at well under face value, because the ordinary people didn’t understand what they were for or what to do with them.
It’s not particularly ethical, but then very little was ethical in 1990s Russia. Not illegal though.
It might be illegal (ie fraud) depending on what representations were made to the sellers.
Second, how did he run the companies he thus acquired? Was there insider dealing? Or bribery? Or anti-trust behaviour etc. He could have done lots of things which might amount to crimes in the U.K. We don't know. Did anyone ask? Or do anything more than the most superficial due diligence?
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
You could ban them on grounds of artistic merit in most cases. Great works about war by the likes of homer and Tolstoy do anything but glorify it.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
No, it's a case for saying that it is reasonable for performers to decide not to perform works that glorify the military of a particular country while that country's military is doing the kind of things that Russia's military is currently doing.
There is no ban. You could put your favorite performance of 1812 on your ghetto blaster and play it down the local park and you wouldn't get arrested, though people would rightly think it peculiar choice of music.
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion. https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
That would be our new bleeding edge AI/robotics tech - developed in top secret over the last 5 years - now unleashed in this time of war and making its presence felt.
I have never known so much hatred as I have received in recent days from Chelsea fans over the sanctioning of Putin’s long-term mate Roman Abramovich. Sorry, but Abramovich washed his dirty money clean through sport."
A question: it look stinky, but is Abramovich's money actually 'dirty', as in illegal? Morality and money are a very different question...
Abramovich made his money buying shares in Russian companies in the 1990s.
A simple version is that when the Soviet Union collapsed, everyone in Russia was given vouchers to buy shares in the major state companies that were being floated. Abramovich had a large team of people in Russia go around and buy up the vouchers from ordinary people at well under face value, because the ordinary people didn’t understand what they were for or what to do with them.
It’s not particularly ethical, but then very little was ethical in 1990s Russia. Not illegal though.
It might be illegal (ie fraud) depending on what representations were made to the sellers.
Second, how did he run the companies he thus acquired? Was there insider dealing? Or bribery? Or anti-trust behaviour etc. He could have done lots of things which might amount to crimes in the U.K. We don't know. Did anyone ask? Or do anything more than the most superficial due diligence?
All good questions but none of them have been answered and we are confiscating his assets because of who his friends might be.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
And, Tchaikovsky himself would no doubt be on Putin's list of gay undesirables, if alive today.
With a sensible "unofficial" pact between Lib Dems and Labour in 2024, the Tories are going to have a load of problems. I think laying Tory majority seems a good bet
The value bet is, I think, Labour most seats ?
I think so. I have the opposite position - Con most seats @ 1.6 - and wish I didn't.
Starmer next PM at 6.8 is an even better bet at the odds than Labour Most Seats?
Awful for the Cons. An 80 seat majority 2 years ago, a pandemic dealt with, a war now on, and they languish in the mid 30s and behind a Lab party who aren't even trying that hard yet.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
And, Tchaikovsky himself would no doubt be on Putin's list of gay undesirables, if alive today.
Putin & Co. have literally expunged any mention of Tchaikovsky being gay from the histories - you'd probably get prosecuted for saying that. Attacking an Icon of Mother Russia or some such....
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
Awful for the Cons. An 80 seat majority 2 years ago, a pandemic dealt with, a war now on, and they languish in the mid 30s and behind a Lab party who aren't even trying that hard yet.
I expect the Brown government in 2009 would have given its eye teeth to be just 2% behind after 12 years of the party in power.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
You could ban them on grounds of artistic merit in most cases. Great works about war by the likes of homer and Tolstoy do anything but glorify it.
All quiet on the Western front.
Im Westen Nichts Neues.
When I was at school I gave a copy to my Grandad who was in the Ambulance Corps in WW1 and asked him how realistic it was. He read it and said it was very accurate except in one respect. The soldiers in the book knew where they were, where they had been and where they were going. The reality was they wouldn't have had a clue.
Otherwise he thought it was excellent and conveyed the horror of war admirably.
It needs to be local. The point of community sponsorship is that the family is welcomed into and supported by the local community. We are part of a volunteer group who have fundraised and applied via the Home Office to welcome a family, there is huge support locally, the only difficulty is finding affordable accommodation, ie a landlord willing to forego most of the rental yield on their property. My wife and I have decided that we may have to be those landlords. We are lucky to be in a financial position to do that. But the ethics of the situation certainly aren't clear-cut, a reason why we have steered clear of becoming buy to let landlords up to now.
It sounds great. And I don't think you should have ethical qualms even if later you become a straightforward BTL landlord. MaxPB will disapprove, but there is a real need for rental homes with decent landlords.
It is not just Max, most people under 40 will disagree with encouraging more BTL.
The problem with the whole "BTL is evil" thing is that it is missing the point. The BTL aren't stealing the housing and shipping it to China or Russia. The problem is that there aren't enough properties for the number of people in the country.
I tried explaining the housing shortage to relatives from Peru - it took a lot of convincing before they would believe me on the policies here.
That assumes renting and buying give similar experiences. They don't. Especially with the UK laws, although many of them have improved a touch over the last decade.
It is not just a question of number of homes, but a question of who owns them as well.
Who owns them only matters if the quantity of homes is fixed.
Unfix the quantity and let people build as many homes as people want to buy and who owns them ceases to matter. Any bad landlords would find themselves owning unoccupied houses that they're forced to pay taxes on because they can't find tenants - while people who want their own homes would be able to just go to the market and get one.
Halting construction gives power to bad landlords because their homes are still "needed" rather than being able to be circumvented and empty.
If people know they are in a home for the next 10-20 years they can act very differently to if they know their contract is for 6 months.
Yes that's completely true but you're missing the point.
The only reason people find it hard to own a home is because planning is so difficult. Liberate the planning system and people would be able to get their own home - if a BTL landlord owns a home that's not a problem, since you can just get a different home nearby.
That way the only people renting are those who want to rent, rather than those who have to because they can't get an alternative.
It is the block on getting the different homes built that causes the problem.
That is utter bollocks. There are still hundreds of thousands of plots with planning permission that the developers are not building on. The problem is not the planning system.
As of 2020 developers were sitting on 440,000 plots with planning permission and an additional 480,000 without specific permission but which are already designated in local plans so will get permission. They claim this is because they need to have a stock for future development - the normal range being 5-10 years worth of land. But if the houses are needed now then they should be developed now and if the current owners don't have the capacity or are unwilling to develop them then they should be forced to sell them to someone who will, not sit on them for a decade whilst the housing crisis gets worse.
Stop blaming planning permission for failures by the developers.
^^^ This is a real problem. We recently gave outline planning permission for a site with over 4,000 new homes. The developer informed us they'd be building out over 20 years. Due to "market forces."
Can you not apply time limits to the planning permission? 4,000 new homes within 8 years and after 8 years the permission lapses and they will not get it renewed?
We're not allowed to do so. As long as they have made a "meaningful start," we're very limited. Especially as anything we do that the developers don't like, they'll take to appeal. With a multi-million-pound QC versus whoever we happen to have at the rates we can afford.
All the arguments you can think of - they'll deploy them.
It needs to be local. The point of community sponsorship is that the family is welcomed into and supported by the local community. We are part of a volunteer group who have fundraised and applied via the Home Office to welcome a family, there is huge support locally, the only difficulty is finding affordable accommodation, ie a landlord willing to forego most of the rental yield on their property. My wife and I have decided that we may have to be those landlords. We are lucky to be in a financial position to do that. But the ethics of the situation certainly aren't clear-cut, a reason why we have steered clear of becoming buy to let landlords up to now.
It sounds great. And I don't think you should have ethical qualms even if later you become a straightforward BTL landlord. MaxPB will disapprove, but there is a real need for rental homes with decent landlords.
It is not just Max, most people under 40 will disagree with encouraging more BTL.
The problem with the whole "BTL is evil" thing is that it is missing the point. The BTL aren't stealing the housing and shipping it to China or Russia. The problem is that there aren't enough properties for the number of people in the country.
I tried explaining the housing shortage to relatives from Peru - it took a lot of convincing before they would believe me on the policies here.
That assumes renting and buying give similar experiences. They don't. Especially with the UK laws, although many of them have improved a touch over the last decade.
It is not just a question of number of homes, but a question of who owns them as well.
Who owns them only matters if the quantity of homes is fixed.
Unfix the quantity and let people build as many homes as people want to buy and who owns them ceases to matter. Any bad landlords would find themselves owning unoccupied houses that they're forced to pay taxes on because they can't find tenants - while people who want their own homes would be able to just go to the market and get one.
Halting construction gives power to bad landlords because their homes are still "needed" rather than being able to be circumvented and empty.
If people know they are in a home for the next 10-20 years they can act very differently to if they know their contract is for 6 months.
Yes that's completely true but you're missing the point.
The only reason people find it hard to own a home is because planning is so difficult. Liberate the planning system and people would be able to get their own home - if a BTL landlord owns a home that's not a problem, since you can just get a different home nearby.
That way the only people renting are those who want to rent, rather than those who have to because they can't get an alternative.
It is the block on getting the different homes built that causes the problem.
That is utter bollocks. There are still hundreds of thousands of plots with planning permission that the developers are not building on. The problem is not the planning system.
As of 2020 developers were sitting on 440,000 plots with planning permission and an additional 480,000 without specific permission but which are already designated in local plans so will get permission. They claim this is because they need to have a stock for future development - the normal range being 5-10 years worth of land. But if the houses are needed now then they should be developed now and if the current owners don't have the capacity or are unwilling to develop them then they should be forced to sell them to someone who will, not sit on them for a decade whilst the housing crisis gets worse.
Stop blaming planning permission for failures by the developers.
^^^ This is a real problem. We recently gave outline planning permission for a site with over 4,000 new homes. The developer informed us they'd be building out over 20 years. Due to "market forces."
That is, if they built out faster, they wouldn't be able to charge as much as prices would fall.
The problem about the supply and demand equation is that the developers know about it too and they aren't dumb.
The problem is you're dealing with a developer.
If planning permission existed automatically for anyone who wanted to build, the developer would get left in the dust by other people going to build before them instead.
If you only give permission to one company, instead of their potential competitors, don't act horrified that the company operates in its own self-interest instead of the interests of the competitors that you're blocking from entering the market.
Why would a developer sell the land for the development to another developer?
Developers don't own all land in this country, far from it. Developers are buying land marked for development which then blocks off other developers from operating as that gives them a valuable asset which remains valuable even if they don't bother to lay a single brick.
If you let people develop wherever they want instead, then developers land hoarding would be pure cost and no gain, so it would stop overnight because its irrational and uneconomic.
The overall quantity of housing wouldn't change that much, but the cost of doing so would no longer be artificially inflated every step of the way.
If developers could develop wherever they want there would be no countryside left
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion. https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
That would be our new bleeding edge AI/robotics tech - developed in top secret over the last 5 years - now unleashed in this time of war and making its presence felt.
It's probably because the FO has a decent set of speechwriters. Though I can only presume Boris never resorted to them.
The U.K.'s trade deficit widened to a record high in January as exports to the EU plunged with an increase in post-Brexit red tape https://trib.al/aoIwWLY
With a sensible "unofficial" pact between Lib Dems and Labour in 2024, the Tories are going to have a load of problems. I think laying Tory majority seems a good bet
The value bet is, I think, Labour most seats ?
I think so. I have the opposite position - Con most seats @ 1.6 - and wish I didn't.
Starmer next PM at 6.8 is an even better bet at the odds than Labour Most Seats?
That Starmer bet is the jewel in my crown. I have it for quite a lot at an average of much higher than it is now - and it's still a back imo, he should be the clear fav in this market. Should be about 5. And yes, I agree it's better than Lab most seats. Lab most seats is solid but imo not a misprice.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
It's a marvellous piece of music.
From 1812 to Shostakovich is akin to from Patton to Private Ryan
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
I was in Chiswick yesterday and passed a flagship Russian Orthodox Church in a quiet side-street there. Gave it a bit of a 'look' as I went by.
It needs to be local. The point of community sponsorship is that the family is welcomed into and supported by the local community. We are part of a volunteer group who have fundraised and applied via the Home Office to welcome a family, there is huge support locally, the only difficulty is finding affordable accommodation, ie a landlord willing to forego most of the rental yield on their property. My wife and I have decided that we may have to be those landlords. We are lucky to be in a financial position to do that. But the ethics of the situation certainly aren't clear-cut, a reason why we have steered clear of becoming buy to let landlords up to now.
It sounds great. And I don't think you should have ethical qualms even if later you become a straightforward BTL landlord. MaxPB will disapprove, but there is a real need for rental homes with decent landlords.
It is not just Max, most people under 40 will disagree with encouraging more BTL.
The problem with the whole "BTL is evil" thing is that it is missing the point. The BTL aren't stealing the housing and shipping it to China or Russia. The problem is that there aren't enough properties for the number of people in the country.
I tried explaining the housing shortage to relatives from Peru - it took a lot of convincing before they would believe me on the policies here.
That assumes renting and buying give similar experiences. They don't. Especially with the UK laws, although many of them have improved a touch over the last decade.
It is not just a question of number of homes, but a question of who owns them as well.
Who owns them only matters if the quantity of homes is fixed.
Unfix the quantity and let people build as many homes as people want to buy and who owns them ceases to matter. Any bad landlords would find themselves owning unoccupied houses that they're forced to pay taxes on because they can't find tenants - while people who want their own homes would be able to just go to the market and get one.
Halting construction gives power to bad landlords because their homes are still "needed" rather than being able to be circumvented and empty.
If people know they are in a home for the next 10-20 years they can act very differently to if they know their contract is for 6 months.
Yes that's completely true but you're missing the point.
The only reason people find it hard to own a home is because planning is so difficult. Liberate the planning system and people would be able to get their own home - if a BTL landlord owns a home that's not a problem, since you can just get a different home nearby.
That way the only people renting are those who want to rent, rather than those who have to because they can't get an alternative.
It is the block on getting the different homes built that causes the problem.
That is utter bollocks. There are still hundreds of thousands of plots with planning permission that the developers are not building on. The problem is not the planning system.
As of 2020 developers were sitting on 440,000 plots with planning permission and an additional 480,000 without specific permission but which are already designated in local plans so will get permission. They claim this is because they need to have a stock for future development - the normal range being 5-10 years worth of land. But if the houses are needed now then they should be developed now and if the current owners don't have the capacity or are unwilling to develop them then they should be forced to sell them to someone who will, not sit on them for a decade whilst the housing crisis gets worse.
Stop blaming planning permission for failures by the developers.
^^^ This is a real problem. We recently gave outline planning permission for a site with over 4,000 new homes. The developer informed us they'd be building out over 20 years. Due to "market forces."
That is, if they built out faster, they wouldn't be able to charge as much as prices would fall.
The problem about the supply and demand equation is that the developers know about it too and they aren't dumb.
The problem is you're dealing with a developer.
If planning permission existed automatically for anyone who wanted to build, the developer would get left in the dust by other people going to build before them instead.
If you only give permission to one company, instead of their potential competitors, don't act horrified that the company operates in its own self-interest instead of the interests of the competitors that you're blocking from entering the market.
Why would a developer sell the land for the development to another developer?
Developers don't own all land in this country, far from it. Developers are buying land marked for development which then blocks off other developers from operating as that gives them a valuable asset which remains valuable even if they don't bother to lay a single brick.
If you let people develop wherever they want instead, then developers land hoarding would be pure cost and no gain, so it would stop overnight because its irrational and uneconomic.
The overall quantity of housing wouldn't change that much, but the cost of doing so would no longer be artificially inflated every step of the way.
If developers could develop wherever they want there would be no countryside left
You're irrational, of course there'd be countryside left. In fact there'd be about the same amount of countryside as there is right now.
Who would pay for removing the countryside in your eyes? Developers would only develop if there's someone willing to pay for the development, and who's going to be paying for developing all over the countryside?
People generally only need 1 home each afterall. Especially when BTL landlords find their tenants are able to afford to move out into a home of their own.
It needs to be local. The point of community sponsorship is that the family is welcomed into and supported by the local community. We are part of a volunteer group who have fundraised and applied via the Home Office to welcome a family, there is huge support locally, the only difficulty is finding affordable accommodation, ie a landlord willing to forego most of the rental yield on their property. My wife and I have decided that we may have to be those landlords. We are lucky to be in a financial position to do that. But the ethics of the situation certainly aren't clear-cut, a reason why we have steered clear of becoming buy to let landlords up to now.
It sounds great. And I don't think you should have ethical qualms even if later you become a straightforward BTL landlord. MaxPB will disapprove, but there is a real need for rental homes with decent landlords.
It is not just Max, most people under 40 will disagree with encouraging more BTL.
The problem with the whole "BTL is evil" thing is that it is missing the point. The BTL aren't stealing the housing and shipping it to China or Russia. The problem is that there aren't enough properties for the number of people in the country.
I tried explaining the housing shortage to relatives from Peru - it took a lot of convincing before they would believe me on the policies here.
That assumes renting and buying give similar experiences. They don't. Especially with the UK laws, although many of them have improved a touch over the last decade.
It is not just a question of number of homes, but a question of who owns them as well.
Who owns them only matters if the quantity of homes is fixed.
Unfix the quantity and let people build as many homes as people want to buy and who owns them ceases to matter. Any bad landlords would find themselves owning unoccupied houses that they're forced to pay taxes on because they can't find tenants - while people who want their own homes would be able to just go to the market and get one.
Halting construction gives power to bad landlords because their homes are still "needed" rather than being able to be circumvented and empty.
If people know they are in a home for the next 10-20 years they can act very differently to if they know their contract is for 6 months.
Yes that's completely true but you're missing the point.
The only reason people find it hard to own a home is because planning is so difficult. Liberate the planning system and people would be able to get their own home - if a BTL landlord owns a home that's not a problem, since you can just get a different home nearby.
That way the only people renting are those who want to rent, rather than those who have to because they can't get an alternative.
It is the block on getting the different homes built that causes the problem.
That is utter bollocks. There are still hundreds of thousands of plots with planning permission that the developers are not building on. The problem is not the planning system.
As of 2020 developers were sitting on 440,000 plots with planning permission and an additional 480,000 without specific permission but which are already designated in local plans so will get permission. They claim this is because they need to have a stock for future development - the normal range being 5-10 years worth of land. But if the houses are needed now then they should be developed now and if the current owners don't have the capacity or are unwilling to develop them then they should be forced to sell them to someone who will, not sit on them for a decade whilst the housing crisis gets worse.
Stop blaming planning permission for failures by the developers.
We live in a 4-bedroom house in Warwickshire which is full of 'stuff'. A previous generation might have down-sized to a bungalow in Abergele but we don't need to do that so we're staying put. I fully recognise that we're part of the problem, but I don't relish becoming part of the solution.
Similarly, Mrs Foxy and I share a 4 bed detached property, but are in no hurry to downsize. We like it and have rather got used to lots of space. There isn't a lot of incentive to downsize.
Proportional property tax, which package includes the abolition of Stamp Duty
Yes, changing council tax to a wealth tax on property of say 1% and abolishing stamp duty would probably do it. Stamp duty is a tax on residential mobility, which goes against efficient markets in housing.
Most people purchase a home between five and ten times during their life, paying £thousands in Stamp Duty each time, yet it is amazing how much fuss people make at the idea of the same money being spread evenly and collected each year across your property owning lifetime. Normally payment by instalments is seen as an advantage.
Facts about ectopic pregnancies: - They’re are not viable. Full stop. - They’re the 1 cause of death for 1st trimester patients.
This will inevitably result in the deaths of women with ectopic pregnancies. A horrible death as well: the Fallopian tube ruptures leading to major internal bleeding which if not treated with surgery leads to death.
It is thoroughly evil to do this to women. So much anti-abortion campaigning seems more focused on punishing women than anything else.
I have never known so much hatred as I have received in recent days from Chelsea fans over the sanctioning of Putin’s long-term mate Roman Abramovich. Sorry, but Abramovich washed his dirty money clean through sport."
A question: it look stinky, but is Abramovich's money actually 'dirty', as in illegal? Morality and money are a very different question...
Abramovich made his money buying shares in Russian companies in the 1990s.
A simple version is that when the Soviet Union collapsed, everyone in Russia was given vouchers to buy shares in the major state companies that were being floated. Abramovich had a large team of people in Russia go around and buy up the vouchers from ordinary people at well under face value, because the ordinary people didn’t understand what they were for or what to do with them.
It’s not particularly ethical, but then very little was ethical in 1990s Russia. Not illegal though.
It might be illegal (ie fraud) depending on what representations were made to the sellers.
Second, how did he run the companies he thus acquired? Was there insider dealing? Or bribery? Or anti-trust behaviour etc. He could have done lots of things which might amount to crimes in the U.K. We don't know. Did anyone ask? Or do anything more than the most superficial due diligence?
All good questions but none of them have been answered and we are confiscating his assets because of who his friends might be.
He is a thief. Same as he was when we let him buy loads of stuff here in the first place.
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion. https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
That would be our new bleeding edge AI/robotics tech - developed in top secret over the last 5 years - now unleashed in this time of war and making its presence felt.
In my lifetime I can't remember a government who have had to deal with so much in their term of office.
Yet polling also shows they do not want hundreds of thousands of refugees either
It is obvious Patel has continued her utter failure from channel migrants to the Ukrainian refugees
The poll is without dispute and not only has she been attacked by conservative mps, the cabinet have pilled into her and now she is sidelined as Harrington and Gove take over the role
I would expect her to be bottom of the next conhome cabinet rankings and she needs quickly shuffling out of office
It needs to be local. The point of community sponsorship is that the family is welcomed into and supported by the local community. We are part of a volunteer group who have fundraised and applied via the Home Office to welcome a family, there is huge support locally, the only difficulty is finding affordable accommodation, ie a landlord willing to forego most of the rental yield on their property. My wife and I have decided that we may have to be those landlords. We are lucky to be in a financial position to do that. But the ethics of the situation certainly aren't clear-cut, a reason why we have steered clear of becoming buy to let landlords up to now.
It sounds great. And I don't think you should have ethical qualms even if later you become a straightforward BTL landlord. MaxPB will disapprove, but there is a real need for rental homes with decent landlords.
It is not just Max, most people under 40 will disagree with encouraging more BTL.
The problem with the whole "BTL is evil" thing is that it is missing the point. The BTL aren't stealing the housing and shipping it to China or Russia. The problem is that there aren't enough properties for the number of people in the country.
I tried explaining the housing shortage to relatives from Peru - it took a lot of convincing before they would believe me on the policies here.
That assumes renting and buying give similar experiences. They don't. Especially with the UK laws, although many of them have improved a touch over the last decade.
It is not just a question of number of homes, but a question of who owns them as well.
Who owns them only matters if the quantity of homes is fixed.
Unfix the quantity and let people build as many homes as people want to buy and who owns them ceases to matter. Any bad landlords would find themselves owning unoccupied houses that they're forced to pay taxes on because they can't find tenants - while people who want their own homes would be able to just go to the market and get one.
Halting construction gives power to bad landlords because their homes are still "needed" rather than being able to be circumvented and empty.
If people know they are in a home for the next 10-20 years they can act very differently to if they know their contract is for 6 months.
Yes that's completely true but you're missing the point.
The only reason people find it hard to own a home is because planning is so difficult. Liberate the planning system and people would be able to get their own home - if a BTL landlord owns a home that's not a problem, since you can just get a different home nearby.
That way the only people renting are those who want to rent, rather than those who have to because they can't get an alternative.
It is the block on getting the different homes built that causes the problem.
That is utter bollocks. There are still hundreds of thousands of plots with planning permission that the developers are not building on. The problem is not the planning system.
As of 2020 developers were sitting on 440,000 plots with planning permission and an additional 480,000 without specific permission but which are already designated in local plans so will get permission. They claim this is because they need to have a stock for future development - the normal range being 5-10 years worth of land. But if the houses are needed now then they should be developed now and if the current owners don't have the capacity or are unwilling to develop them then they should be forced to sell them to someone who will, not sit on them for a decade whilst the housing crisis gets worse.
Stop blaming planning permission for failures by the developers.
We live in a 4-bedroom house in Warwickshire which is full of 'stuff'. A previous generation might have down-sized to a bungalow in Abergele but we don't need to do that so we're staying put. I fully recognise that we're part of the problem, but I don't relish becoming part of the solution.
Similarly, Mrs Foxy and I share a 4 bed detached property, but are in no hurry to downsize. We like it and have rather got used to lots of space. There isn't a lot of incentive to downsize.
Proportional property tax, which package includes the abolition of Stamp Duty
Yes, changing council tax to a wealth tax on property of say 1% and abolishing stamp duty would probably do it. Stamp duty is a tax on residential mobility, which goes against efficient markets in housing.
Most people purchase a home between five and ten times during their life, paying £thousands in Stamp Duty each time, yet it is amazing how much fuss people make at the idea of the same money being spread evenly and collected each year across your property owning lifetime. Normally payment by instalments is seen as an advantage.
Five to ten times :S ?!
I've bought twice and sold once and the plan is to leave this one in a box.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
I was in Chiswick yesterday and passed a flagship Russian Orthodox Church in a quiet side-street there. Gave it a bit of a 'look' as I went by.
I know it well..
Depends on whether the Priest and congregation are on-side with the comic lot who run the church in Russia. I should ask some Russian friends about that.....
Only question is what the Belarussian troops who don't want to be there will do. Lay down their arms or jump sides?
Rape and looting spree to make the trip worthwhile. Whatever happens now Ukraine is finished as a viable state; possibly forever.
I am not so sure. It looks to me that Ukraine is developing an ever stronger national consciousness. There will be a lot of international support for rebuilding it, and liberating the rest.
Of course we ignore that Ukranian oligarchs are no angels either.
It's not in the west's interests to have a decisive victory one way or the other. They'd prefer for this to drag on for years bleeding Russia out gradually rather than risk upending the whole chessboard.
The US, UK, etc also have to carefully calibrate the amount and type of weapons they put in to Ukraine as at least some of them are going to end being sold on the black market or in Russian hands. As a complete Javelin plus CLU already have.
With what are these Russians hands going to buy this kit - rubles?
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
It's a marvellous piece of music.
From 1812 to Shostakovich is akin to from Patton to Private Ryan
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion. https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
That would be our new bleeding edge AI/robotics tech - developed in top secret over the last 5 years - now unleashed in this time of war and making its presence felt.
In my lifetime I can't remember a government who have had to deal with so much in their term of office.
With a sensible "unofficial" pact between Lib Dems and Labour in 2024, the Tories are going to have a load of problems. I think laying Tory majority seems a good bet
The value bet is, I think, Labour most seats ?
I think so. I have the opposite position - Con most seats @ 1.6 - and wish I didn't.
Starmer next PM at 6.8 is an even better bet at the odds than Labour Most Seats?
I’m not so sure - for the Tories, the argument for not fighting another GE under Johnson remains compelling.
With a sensible "unofficial" pact between Lib Dems and Labour in 2024, the Tories are going to have a load of problems. I think laying Tory majority seems a good bet
The value bet is, I think, Labour most seats ?
I think so. I have the opposite position - Con most seats @ 1.6 - and wish I didn't.
Starmer next PM at 6.8 is an even better bet at the odds than Labour Most Seats?
That Starmer bet is the jewel in my crown. I have it for quite a lot at an average of much higher than it is now - and it's still a back imo, he should be the clear fav in this market. Should be about 5. And yes, I agree it's better than Lab most seats. Lab most seats is solid but imo not a misprice.
The bet I've been banging on about is a Lay of Starmer exit date 2023 or earlier. 3.65 currently with Smarkets.
The risk is a early GE and Starmer defeat and resignation, but even then the GE would need Sept 2023 at the latest, I reckon, when you factor in the three months it takes LP to elect a new leader.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
No, it's a case for saying that it is reasonable for performers to decide not to perform works that glorify the military of a particular country while that country's military is doing the kind of things that Russia's military is currently doing.
There is no ban. You could put your favorite performance of 1812 on your ghetto blaster and play it down the local park and you wouldn't get arrested, though people would rightly think it peculiar choice of music.
I always wondered what it was like being German after the Burning of the Great Library in Louvain (now Leuven).
It was presented in the English-speaking world as a uniquely barbaric, German act -- the destruction of a great cultural treasure by the militaristic Hun. The British would never have stooped so low, they said. They would never rape another country, like the Germans raped Belgium and burnt the treasures at Leuven.
And the intellectuals and scientists and writers of Germany and Great Britain then engaged in thoroughly discreditable behaviour, excusing the barbarism of their own side. The Manifesto of the 92, the Writers declaration.
We might have hoped that we are beyond that now. Alas, no.
We should be maintaining all personal and cultural and academic and scientific links with Russia & Russians.
And the replacement of a piece by Tchaikovsky is at the same ridiculous level as the anti-German hysteria in the UK after the Rape of Belgium.
It is like the renaming of German shepherd dogs as Alsatians, as happened in the rampant anti-German hysteria in 1914.
I have never known so much hatred as I have received in recent days from Chelsea fans over the sanctioning of Putin’s long-term mate Roman Abramovich. Sorry, but Abramovich washed his dirty money clean through sport."
A question: it look stinky, but is Abramovich's money actually 'dirty', as in illegal? Morality and money are a very different question...
Abramovich made his money buying shares in Russian companies in the 1990s.
A simple version is that when the Soviet Union collapsed, everyone in Russia was given vouchers to buy shares in the major state companies that were being floated. Abramovich had a large team of people in Russia go around and buy up the vouchers from ordinary people at well under face value, because the ordinary people didn’t understand what they were for or what to do with them.
It’s not particularly ethical, but then very little was ethical in 1990s Russia. Not illegal though.
It might be illegal (ie fraud) depending on what representations were made to the sellers.
Second, how did he run the companies he thus acquired? Was there insider dealing? Or bribery? Or anti-trust behaviour etc. He could have done lots of things which might amount to crimes in the U.K. We don't know. Did anyone ask? Or do anything more than the most superficial due diligence?
All good questions but none of them have been answered and we are confiscating his assets because of who his friends might be.
He is a thief. Same as he was when we let him buy loads of stuff here in the first place.
Yeah no I get it to you lefties all property is theft but we in this country (used to) prefer to operate under the rule of law.
Otherwise every spivvy City trader who has made good would be deemed to be a thief and have their property confiscated. Which would be ghastly, wouldn't it.
What I'd like to know in relation to Abramovic is what is he responsible for to warrant the sanction. Then I'd be able to judge. There was a suggestion of his steel company's involvement in Russian military contracts in the Daily Mirror.
I think I do expect due process in terms of who is or isn't sanctioned and as much public information as practicable as to reasons beyond he's Russian or he's an oligarch.
I know one of the complaints about Russian oligarchs is their aggressive and proactive use of the UK law courts to obscure their links. I guess a side effect of sanctions may be to reduce the ability to use their billions in such a way.
I'm not against sanctioning Abramovic, I'm simply not in a position to know.
Sky reporting Chelsea fans continued chanting Abramovich name at the match last night
Astonishing deaf ears
Some are still out to lynch Bryant too. Fortunately they don't know where to find the Rhonnda.
Did Chris Bryant know where to find the Rhondda before he became the MP?
Private school in Cheltenham, Oxbridge, Oxford University Conservative Association .... I dislike people being parachuted into constituencies with which they have little or zero connection.
it is less of a problem for Labour as it once was because they no longer have many safe seats. The notion of Llanelli as a potential Labour/ Con marginal as touted on here last year confirms that.
Anyway, Perhaps you may be able to help the Chelsea glitterati with their directions.
Only question is what the Belarussian troops who don't want to be there will do. Lay down their arms or jump sides?
Rape and looting spree to make the trip worthwhile. Whatever happens now Ukraine is finished as a viable state; possibly forever.
I am not so sure. It looks to me that Ukraine is developing an ever stronger national consciousness. There will be a lot of international support for rebuilding it, and liberating the rest.
Of course we ignore that Ukranian oligarchs are no angels either.
It's not in the west's interests to have a decisive victory one way or the other. They'd prefer for this to drag on for years bleeding Russia out gradually rather than risk upending the whole chessboard.
The US, UK, etc also have to carefully calibrate the amount and type of weapons they put in to Ukraine as at least some of them are going to end being sold on the black market or in Russian hands. As a complete Javelin plus CLU already have.
With what are these Russians hands going to buy this kit - rubles?
What they're best at: misinformation.
"I'll have three lies about a hospital bombing and another about a dungeon under an American pizza shop." "Sure, that'll be three computer chips and a Big Mac."
Only question is what the Belarussian troops who don't want to be there will do. Lay down their arms or jump sides?
Rape and looting spree to make the trip worthwhile. Whatever happens now Ukraine is finished as a viable state; possibly forever.
I am not so sure. It looks to me that Ukraine is developing an ever stronger national consciousness. There will be a lot of international support for rebuilding it, and liberating the rest.
Of course we ignore that Ukranian oligarchs are no angels either.
It's not in the west's interests to have a decisive victory one way or the other. They'd prefer for this to drag on for years bleeding Russia out gradually rather than risk upending the whole chessboard.
The US, UK, etc also have to carefully calibrate the amount and type of weapons they put in to Ukraine as at least some of them are going to end being sold on the black market or in Russian hands. As a complete Javelin plus CLU already have.
With what are these Russians hands going to buy this kit - rubles?
Duh? The Russians capture a weapon and sell it on to the black market for dollars.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
No, it's a case for saying that it is reasonable for performers to decide not to perform works that glorify the military of a particular country while that country's military is doing the kind of things that Russia's military is currently doing.
There is no ban. You could put your favorite performance of 1812 on your ghetto blaster and play it down the local park and you wouldn't get arrested, though people would rightly think it peculiar choice of music.
I always wondered what it was like being German after the Burning of the Great Library in Louvain (now Leuven).
It was presented in the English-speaking world as a uniquely barbaric, German act -- the destruction of a great cultural treasure by the militaristic Hun. The British would never have stooped so low, they said. They would never rape another country, like the Germans raped Belgium and burnt the treasures at Leuven.
And the intellectuals and scientists and writers of Germany and Great Britain then engaged in thoroughly discreditable behaviour, excusing the barbarism of their own side. The Manifesto of the 92, the Writers declaration.
We might have hoped that we are beyond that now. Alas, no.
We should be maintaining all personal and cultural and academic and scientific links with Russia & Russians.
And the replacement of a piece by Tchaikovsky is at the same ridiculous level as the anti-German hysteria in the UK after the Rape of Belgium.
It is like the renaming of German shepherd dogs as Alsatians, as happened in the rampant anti-German hysteria in 1914.
OK either you are this big hearted inclusive internationalist, or you are running the utterly nonsensical claim that Wales is part of an English Empire. One or the other.
What I'd like to know in relation to Abramovic is what is he responsible for to warrant the sanction. Then I'd be able to judge. There was a suggestion of his steel company's involvement in Russian military contracts in the Daily Mirror.
I think I do expect due process in terms of who is or isn't sanctioned and as much public information as practicable as to reasons beyond he's Russian or he's an oligarch.
I know one of the complaints about Russian oligarchs is their aggressive and proactive use of the UK law courts to obscure their links. I guess a side effect of sanctions may be to reduce the ability to use their billions in such a way.
I'm not against sanctioning Abramovic, I'm simply not in a position to know.
Ultimately it's political. He hasn't helped himself by not calling out Putin and Russia. Perhaps that's understandable given that he's worried about his safety, but I don't much sympathy for him.
By calling for him to be sanctioned - with no specific evidence - Labour gave the government complete cover to just do it.
Sky reporting Chelsea fans continued chanting Abramovich name at the match last night
Astonishing deaf ears
Some are still out to lynch Bryant too. Fortunately they don't know where to find the Rhonnda.
Did Chris Bryant know where to find the Rhondda before he became the MP?
Private school in Cheltenham, Oxbridge, Oxford University Conservative Association .... I dislike people being parachuted into constituencies with which they have little or zero connection.
it is less of a problem for Labour as it once was because they no longer have many safe seats. The notion of Llanelli as a potential Labour/ Con marginal as touted on here last year confirms that.
Anyway, Perhaps you may be able to help the Chelsea glitterati with their directions.
Llanelli is where my cousin lives, on a grim drug-addled council estate.
It is a sad town that has fallen on hard & desperate times.
My prediction is that Dnipro and Odessa are going to be taken by Russia in the next 72 hours. At which point there will be a mass overreaction in the media and on PB about how everyone was wrong and Russia is going to win the war, and Ukraine should just surrender and hand over territory. Then Ukraine will fight on and after a couple weeks it will be shown Russia doesn't really have control of the cities it has taken and there is no exit plan.
With a sensible "unofficial" pact between Lib Dems and Labour in 2024, the Tories are going to have a load of problems. I think laying Tory majority seems a good bet
The value bet is, I think, Labour most seats ?
I think so. I have the opposite position - Con most seats @ 1.6 - and wish I didn't.
Starmer next PM at 6.8 is an even better bet at the odds than Labour Most Seats?
I’ve got some money on him at 9/1 after a thread of OGH a while ago. When I get a free bet with ladbrokes it goes on him as next PM as well.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
No, it's a case for saying that it is reasonable for performers to decide not to perform works that glorify the military of a particular country while that country's military is doing the kind of things that Russia's military is currently doing.
There is no ban. You could put your favorite performance of 1812 on your ghetto blaster and play it down the local park and you wouldn't get arrested, though people would rightly think it peculiar choice of music.
I always wondered what it was like being German after the Burning of the Great Library in Louvain (now Leuven).
It was presented in the English-speaking world as a uniquely barbaric, German act -- the destruction of a great cultural treasure by the militaristic Hun. The British would never have stooped so low, they said. They would never rape another country, like the Germans raped Belgium and burnt the treasures at Leuven.
And the intellectuals and scientists and writers of Germany and Great Britain then engaged in thoroughly discreditable behaviour, excusing the barbarism of their own side. The Manifesto of the 92, the Writers declaration.
We might have hoped that we are beyond that now. Alas, no.
We should be maintaining all personal and cultural and academic and scientific links with Russia & Russians.
And the replacement of a piece by Tchaikovsky is at the same ridiculous level as the anti-German hysteria in the UK after the Rape of Belgium.
It is like the renaming of German shepherd dogs as Alsatians, as happened in the rampant anti-German hysteria in 1914.
Is that why dachshunds became known as sausage dogs? I seem recall reading tells of them being stoned early in WWI in histories of the time.
Incidentally I don't remember them ever being as popular as they seem to be now.
It anchors people by absurdly giving - to the 76% of people who have already said they do want Britain to offer to "resettle" some refugees - the first option as "fewer than a hundred" (an option chosen by 0% of those people). So it's actually surprising as many as 20% chose the *highest* option offered of "a few hundreds of thousands".
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
No, it's a case for saying that it is reasonable for performers to decide not to perform works that glorify the military of a particular country while that country's military is doing the kind of things that Russia's military is currently doing.
There is no ban. You could put your favorite performance of 1812 on your ghetto blaster and play it down the local park and you wouldn't get arrested, though people would rightly think it peculiar choice of music.
I always wondered what it was like being German after the Burning of the Great Library in Louvain (now Leuven).
It was presented in the English-speaking world as a uniquely barbaric, German act -- the destruction of a great cultural treasure by the militaristic Hun. The British would never have stooped so low, they said. They would never rape another country, like the Germans raped Belgium and burnt the treasures at Leuven.
And the intellectuals and scientists and writers of Germany and Great Britain then engaged in thoroughly discreditable behaviour, excusing the barbarism of their own side. The Manifesto of the 92, the Writers declaration.
We might have hoped that we are beyond that now. Alas, no.
We should be maintaining all personal and cultural and academic and scientific links with Russia & Russians.
And the replacement of a piece by Tchaikovsky is at the same ridiculous level as the anti-German hysteria in the UK after the Rape of Belgium.
It is like the renaming of German shepherd dogs as Alsatians, as happened in the rampant anti-German hysteria in 1914.
Is that why dachshunds became known as sausage dogs? I seem recall reading tells of them being stoned early in WWI in histories of the time.
Incidentally I don't remember them ever being as popular as they seem to be now.
My prediction is that Dnipro and Odessa are going to be taken by Russia in the next 72 hours. At which point there will be a mass overreaction in the media and on PB about how everyone was wrong and Russia is going to win the war, and Ukraine should just surrender and hand over territory. Then Ukraine will fight on and after a couple weeks it will be shown Russia doesn't really have control of the cities it has taken and there is no exit plan.
Sounds about right.
And if in desperation Putin uses chemicals, then we'll be in the 'something must be done' zone again.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
(Although honourable menshuns for some posters on pb.com).
Yes, that's utterly ridiculous. What next? 'War and Peace' dropped from the 'A' Level syllabus?
No it isn't. "Where do you draw the line?" is always a much easier question than the people proposing it think it is. In this case, directly under the piece of inappropriate bombastic wankerdom which is the 1812.
I'm not drawing any line. I simply don't think works of art should be censored because the government of the country the artist happened to be born in does deplorably things over a century after the artist's death.
use of the word "censorship" in this case seems a better candidate for any Hysteria Award.
the 1812 hasn't been outlawed.
what's more, even the Cardiff Philharmonic is performing pieces by other Russian composers so it obviously has nothing to do with where composers happened to be born.
If it's got nothing to do with where the artist was born, and considering armed conflict goes on pretty much all the time, then that sounds like a case for banning all works that glorify war and the military permanently.
No, it's a case for saying that it is reasonable for performers to decide not to perform works that glorify the military of a particular country while that country's military is doing the kind of things that Russia's military is currently doing.
There is no ban. You could put your favorite performance of 1812 on your ghetto blaster and play it down the local park and you wouldn't get arrested, though people would rightly think it peculiar choice of music.
I always wondered what it was like being German after the Burning of the Great Library in Louvain (now Leuven).
It was presented in the English-speaking world as a uniquely barbaric, German act -- the destruction of a great cultural treasure by the militaristic Hun. The British would never have stooped so low, they said. They would never rape another country, like the Germans raped Belgium and burnt the treasures at Leuven.
And the intellectuals and scientists and writers of Germany and Great Britain then engaged in thoroughly discreditable behaviour, excusing the barbarism of their own side. The Manifesto of the 92, the Writers declaration.
We might have hoped that we are beyond that now. Alas, no.
We should be maintaining all personal and cultural and academic and scientific links with Russia & Russians.
And the replacement of a piece by Tchaikovsky is at the same ridiculous level as the anti-German hysteria in the UK after the Rape of Belgium.
It is like the renaming of German shepherd dogs as Alsatians, as happened in the rampant anti-German hysteria in 1914.
Is that why dachshunds became known as sausage dogs? I seem recall reading tells of them being stoned early in WWI in histories of the time.
Incidentally I don't remember them ever being as popular as they seem to be now.
Incidentally, I'm expecting Russia to launch asymmetric attacks on us this year: think Salisbury or Litvinenko. They were doing it *before* the sanctions and Ukraine; why wouldn't they use the techniques now?
That's a cheery Friday afternoon thought for you...
Only question is what the Belarussian troops who don't want to be there will do. Lay down their arms or jump sides?
Rape and looting spree to make the trip worthwhile. Whatever happens now Ukraine is finished as a viable state; possibly forever.
I am not so sure. It looks to me that Ukraine is developing an ever stronger national consciousness. There will be a lot of international support for rebuilding it, and liberating the rest.
Of course we ignore that Ukranian oligarchs are no angels either.
It's not in the west's interests to have a decisive victory one way or the other. They'd prefer for this to drag on for years bleeding Russia out gradually rather than risk upending the whole chessboard.
The US, UK, etc also have to carefully calibrate the amount and type of weapons they put in to Ukraine as at least some of them are going to end being sold on the black market or in Russian hands. As a complete Javelin plus CLU already have.
With what are these Russians hands going to buy this kit - rubles?
I have never known so much hatred as I have received in recent days from Chelsea fans over the sanctioning of Putin’s long-term mate Roman Abramovich. Sorry, but Abramovich washed his dirty money clean through sport."
A question: it look stinky, but is Abramovich's money actually 'dirty', as in illegal? Morality and money are a very different question...
Abramovich made his money buying shares in Russian companies in the 1990s.
A simple version is that when the Soviet Union collapsed, everyone in Russia was given vouchers to buy shares in the major state companies that were being floated. Abramovich had a large team of people in Russia go around and buy up the vouchers from ordinary people at well under face value, because the ordinary people didn’t understand what they were for or what to do with them.
It’s not particularly ethical, but then very little was ethical in 1990s Russia. Not illegal though.
It might be illegal (ie fraud) depending on what representations were made to the sellers.
Second, how did he run the companies he thus acquired? Was there insider dealing? Or bribery? Or anti-trust behaviour etc. He could have done lots of things which might amount to crimes in the U.K. We don't know. Did anyone ask? Or do anything more than the most superficial due diligence?
All good questions but none of them have been answered and we are confiscating his assets because of who his friends might be.
He is a thief. Same as he was when we let him buy loads of stuff here in the first place.
Yeah no I get it to you lefties all property is theft but we in this country (used to) prefer to operate under the rule of law.
Otherwise every spivvy City trader who has made good would be deemed to be a thief and have their property confiscated. Which would be ghastly, wouldn't it.
It's not equivalent to a spivvy City trader. In this case we have somebody who has corruptly colluded with gangster politicians - including Head Honcho Vladimir Putin who is now trashing a whole country that isn't even his - to effectively transfer billions of pounds from the pockets of the Russian people into his own. He's a criminal and if he loses assets now but stays out of jail he's ahead of the game.
My prediction is that Dnipro and Odessa are going to be taken by Russia in the next 72 hours. At which point there will be a mass overreaction in the media and on PB about how everyone was wrong and Russia is going to win the war, and Ukraine should just surrender and hand over territory. Then Ukraine will fight on and after a couple weeks it will be shown Russia doesn't really have control of the cities it has taken and there is no exit plan.
At what point will the Stop the War types demand an end to support for Ukraine, claiming that it is just pointlessly extending the suffering etc etc
With a sensible "unofficial" pact between Lib Dems and Labour in 2024, the Tories are going to have a load of problems. I think laying Tory majority seems a good bet
The value bet is, I think, Labour most seats ?
I think so. I have the opposite position - Con most seats @ 1.6 - and wish I didn't.
Starmer next PM at 6.8 is an even better bet at the odds than Labour Most Seats?
That Starmer bet is the jewel in my crown. I have it for quite a lot at an average of much higher than it is now - and it's still a back imo, he should be the clear fav in this market. Should be about 5. And yes, I agree it's better than Lab most seats. Lab most seats is solid but imo not a misprice.
The bet I've been banging on about is a Lay of Starmer exit date 2023 or earlier. 3.65 currently with Smarkets.
The risk is a early GE and Starmer defeat and resignation, but even then the GE would need Sept 2023 at the latest, I reckon, when you factor in the three months it takes LP to elect a new leader.
Yes, that's buying money. It should be much longer.
I also think the Lab outright majority is a lay at 5. The fences they have to jump to reach that are Aintree level.
My prediction is that Dnipro and Odessa are going to be taken by Russia in the next 72 hours. At which point there will be a mass overreaction in the media and on PB about how everyone was wrong and Russia is going to win the war, and Ukraine should just surrender and hand over territory. Then Ukraine will fight on and after a couple weeks it will be shown Russia doesn't really have control of the cities it has taken and there is no exit plan.
At what point will the Stop the War types demand an end to support for Ukraine, claiming that it is just pointlessly extending the suffering etc etc
If not now it must be imminent. Perhaps if the Russians take Odessa and Dnipro imminently as Aslan suspects.
My prediction is that Dnipro and Odessa are going to be taken by Russia in the next 72 hours. At which point there will be a mass overreaction in the media and on PB about how everyone was wrong and Russia is going to win the war, and Ukraine should just surrender and hand over territory. Then Ukraine will fight on and after a couple weeks it will be shown Russia doesn't really have control of the cities it has taken and there is no exit plan.
At what point will the Stop the War types demand an end to support for Ukraine, claiming that it is just pointlessly extending the suffering etc etc
Interestingly, this argument isn’t just from the stop the war types - Konstantin Kisin made the same argument on his triggernometry podcast.
They’d raised some money for the Ukrainian army and then changed their mind and decided to give it to humanitarian causes instead, using this logic.
Incidentally, I'm expecting Russia to launch asymmetric attacks on us this year: think Salisbury or Litvinenko. They were doing it *before* the sanctions and Ukraine; why wouldn't they use the techniques now?
That's a cheery Friday afternoon thought for you...
If such an attack occurred, the probable response would be an airstrike against those slow moving columns in Ukraine.
Putin's advisors would be able to work that one out.
Only question is what the Belarussian troops who don't want to be there will do. Lay down their arms or jump sides?
Rape and looting spree to make the trip worthwhile. Whatever happens now Ukraine is finished as a viable state; possibly forever.
I am not so sure. It looks to me that Ukraine is developing an ever stronger national consciousness. There will be a lot of international support for rebuilding it, and liberating the rest.
Of course we ignore that Ukranian oligarchs are no angels either.
It's not in the west's interests to have a decisive victory one way or the other. They'd prefer for this to drag on for years bleeding Russia out gradually rather than risk upending the whole chessboard.
The US, UK, etc also have to carefully calibrate the amount and type of weapons they put in to Ukraine as at least some of them are going to end being sold on the black market or in Russian hands. As a complete Javelin plus CLU already have.
With what are these Russians hands going to buy this kit - rubles?
Incidentally, I'm expecting Russia to launch asymmetric attacks on us this year: think Salisbury or Litvinenko. They were doing it *before* the sanctions and Ukraine; why wouldn't they use the techniques now?
That's a cheery Friday afternoon thought for you...
If such an attack occurred, the probable response would be an airstrike against those slow moving columns in Ukraine.
Putin's advisors would be able to work that one out.
Sadly, I'm thinking about the aftermath of Ukraine, once things have 'settled' down. He will be looking for vengeance, especially if he works around the sanctions.
Incidentally, I'm expecting Russia to launch asymmetric attacks on us this year: think Salisbury or Litvinenko. They were doing it *before* the sanctions and Ukraine; why wouldn't they use the techniques now?
That's a cheery Friday afternoon thought for you...
As I understand it, immediately after conducting the Saulsberry and Litvinenko attacks the Russian agents left the country back to Russia, before we could work out what happened and could do anything. As that cant happen now that flights have been stopped, they cant operate in the same way.
That's not to say They will not try something, they properly will, but its more likely to be cyber attacks or something else we have not seen before IMHO
V. important paper published in the Lancet - the first peer-reviewed global estimates of excess deaths (the most reliable way to compare Covid deaths) over first 2 years of pandemic with findings that will surprise many & correct five widespread misconceptions / assumptions: 1/9
1. Far from the UK having the worst death rate in Europe (or even Western Europe) as many still think, it is actually 29th in Europe & 9th in Western Europe - below the Western European average & at the same level as France & Germany (no statistically significant difference)....
3. England hasn't had a higher death rate than other home nations: all are basically the same level with no statistically significant difference:
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
I was in Chiswick yesterday and passed a flagship Russian Orthodox Church in a quiet side-street there. Gave it a bit of a 'look' as I went by.
I know it well..
Depends on whether the Priest and congregation are on-side with the comic lot who run the church in Russia. I should ask some Russian friends about that.....
From my quick and superficial review it had a White Russian feel to it. But that doesn't mean much. Seems Putin has a bit of that himself. In a confused way though. A nostalgia both for the USSR and the Imperial Dynasty swept away by what created the USSR. Think it just boils down to him thinking Mother Russia is innately very special and has a god given right to be big and powerful and feared and revered by all. Usual crap.
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion. https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
That would be our new bleeding edge AI/robotics tech - developed in top secret over the last 5 years - now unleashed in this time of war and making its presence felt.
In my lifetime I can't remember a government who have had to deal with so much in their term of office.
No, it's been extremely eventful and no sign of that changing. "May we live in less interesting times" is how I feel about it.
Pretty ridiculous front pages for the most part. Abramovic might or might not be a nice guy but why the British press have to personalise things to the extent that it reads like he's responsible for the slaughter in Ukraine I don't know. It just makes the country look stupid and hysterical
Perhaps the Hysteria Award can be given to the Cardiff Philharmonic
“The truth is that every Russian will feel guilty for decades because of the terrible and bloody decision that none of us could influence and predict,” he said in a Facebook statement. He later commented on the cancellation environment caused by the conflict. “I still believe Russian culture and music specifically should not be tarnished by the ongoing tragedy.”
“People cannot be judged by their nationality,” he wrote.
The cultural boycotting is indeed based on nationality, however. The Canada Council for the Arts, for example, has announced it would support Ukraine by cutting off funding to any Canadian projects involving the participation of Russian or Belarusian artists or arts organizations as long as Russia keeps its military forces in Ukraine. The Canadian institutions dissociating themselves from Russia for the time being base their decisions on a number of issues, including the matter of performance fees paid to Russian nationals....
That sound really stupid. Because, while there are Greater Russian Nationalist artists, art in Russia (as in many countries) tends towards the kind of policies and personal behaviours that Putin *hates*
I was in Chiswick yesterday and passed a flagship Russian Orthodox Church in a quiet side-street there. Gave it a bit of a 'look' as I went by.
I know it well..
Depends on whether the Priest and congregation are on-side with the comic lot who run the church in Russia. I should ask some Russian friends about that.....
From my quick and superficial review it had a White Russian feel to it. But that doesn't mean much. Seems Putin has a bit of that himself. In a confused way though. A nostalgia both for the USSR and the Imperial Dynasty swept away by what created the USSR. Think it just boils down to him thinking Mother Russia is innately very special and has a god given right to be big and powerful and feared and revered by all. Usual crap.
Greater Russian Nationalism is about bringing *All* of Russia together - the Communist thing is just a phase. Unite under the banner.......
Awful for the Cons. An 80 seat majority 2 years ago, a pandemic dealt with, a war now on, and they languish in the mid 30s and behind a Lab party who aren't even trying that hard yet.
I expect the Brown government in 2009 would have given its eye teeth to be just 2% behind after 12 years of the party in power.
Even Thatcher trailed by far more than 2% by 1990
Both not good comparisons. Here we have what was effectively a new government winning a landslide 2 years ago and now trailing. It only looks ok for them cf the partygate slump. Big picture is Labour heading for minority government. Far from a done deal, of course, but heading there.
V. important paper published in the Lancet - the first peer-reviewed global estimates of excess deaths (the most reliable way to compare Covid deaths) over first 2 years of pandemic with findings that will surprise many & correct five widespread misconceptions / assumptions: 1/9
1. Far from the UK having the worst death rate in Europe (or even Western Europe) as many still think, it is actually 29th in Europe & 9th in Western Europe - below the Western European average & at the same level as France & Germany (no statistically significant difference)....
3. England hasn't had a higher death rate than other home nations: all are basically the same level with no statistically significant difference:
Comments
Increasingly looks like for a vocal minority of people, talking about Covid has entered religious purity test territory.
We've known since Jan that Covid IFR was closing in on flu, so it crossing the line is barely new.
What we spent a week demonstrating is that Covid is still adding to mortality risk above and beyond a bad flu season.
Yet a lot of responses essentially say "thou shalt not mention the fact that Covid has become less lethal ⛪, even if you're the first people to show that it's still adding risk".
Anyway, it's always good to know which people are interested in forming an evidence-based understanding of the world, and which are more interested in maintaining and policing a rigid belief system
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1502240909244649480
The US, UK, etc also have to carefully calibrate the amount and type of weapons they put in to Ukraine as at least some of them are going to end being sold on the black market or in Russian hands. As a complete Javelin plus CLU already have.
Elgar has almost nothing to do with it, the words were retrofitted to the music by A C Benson
And he was working class.
I have shocking news. I just listened to For Sec Liz Truss speak at the Atlantic Council - and she was measured, thoughtful, and purposeful, with some excellent messaging - "How we respond to this crisis will define our future". Avoided cheap digs at EU, or self-promotion.
https://twitter.com/alexhallhall/status/1502033962922872840
And the southern boundary taken appears to be the Trent, which leaves 50k people in West Bridgford who live within about 1-2m of Nottingham's Market Square, Trent Bridge Cricket Ground *and* Nottingham Forest football ground OUTSIDE Greater Nottingham.
Dumbo dumbo dumbo.
(Apols for my bluntness, but that is self-satirical)
LAB: 38% (=)
CON: 36% (+1)
LDM: 9% (-1)
GRN: 6% (=)
SNP: 4% (=)
Conservatives at highest polling since partygate
Via @techneUK, 9-10 Mar.
Changes w/ 2-3 Mar.
They're not cancelling due to outside pressure, but rather due to personal discomfort.
Second, how did he run the companies he thus acquired? Was there insider dealing? Or bribery? Or anti-trust behaviour etc. He could have done lots of things which might amount to crimes in the U.K. We don't know. Did anyone ask? Or do anything more than the most superficial due diligence?
There is no ban. You could put your favorite performance of 1812 on your ghetto blaster and play it down the local park and you wouldn't get arrested, though people would rightly think it peculiar choice of music.
Even Thatcher trailed by far more than 2% by 1990
When I was at school I gave a copy to my Grandad who was in the Ambulance Corps in WW1 and asked him how realistic it was. He read it and said it was very accurate except in one respect. The soldiers in the book knew where they were, where they had been and where they were going. The reality was they wouldn't have had a clue.
Otherwise he thought it was excellent and conveyed the horror of war admirably.
As long as they have made a "meaningful start," we're very limited. Especially as anything we do that the developers don't like, they'll take to appeal. With a multi-million-pound QC versus whoever we happen to have at the rates we can afford.
All the arguments you can think of - they'll deploy them.
- Favourability towards Boris Johnson rebounds to pre partygate levels but half still unfavourable.
- Johnson's scores for leadership traits improve from Feb but still worse than a year ago
Though I can only presume Boris never resorted to them.
Key details about Whitehall divide from @FraserNelson in today's @Telegraph
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/03/10/britains-bungled-response-ukraine-refugee-crisis-goes-right/
Who would pay for removing the countryside in your eyes? Developers would only develop if there's someone willing to pay for the development, and who's going to be paying for developing all over the countryside?
People generally only need 1 home each afterall. Especially when BTL landlords find their tenants are able to afford to move out into a home of their own.
It is thoroughly evil to do this to women. So much anti-abortion campaigning seems more focused on punishing women than anything else.
The poll is without dispute and not only has she been attacked by conservative mps, the cabinet have pilled into her and now she is sidelined as Harrington and Gove take over the role
I would expect her to be bottom of the next conhome cabinet rankings and she needs quickly shuffling out of office
I've bought twice and sold once and the plan is to leave this one in a box.
Depends on whether the Priest and congregation are on-side with the comic lot who run the church in Russia. I should ask some Russian friends about that.....
The risk is a early GE and Starmer defeat and resignation, but even then the GE would need Sept 2023 at the latest, I reckon, when you factor in the three months it takes LP to elect a new leader.
It was presented in the English-speaking world as a uniquely barbaric, German act -- the destruction of a great cultural treasure by the militaristic Hun. The British would never have stooped so low, they said. They would never rape another country, like the Germans raped Belgium and burnt the treasures at Leuven.
And the intellectuals and scientists and writers of Germany and Great Britain then engaged in thoroughly discreditable behaviour, excusing the barbarism of their own side. The Manifesto of the 92, the Writers declaration.
We might have hoped that we are beyond that now. Alas, no.
We should be maintaining all personal and cultural and academic and scientific links with Russia & Russians.
And the replacement of a piece by Tchaikovsky is at the same ridiculous level as the anti-German hysteria in the UK after the Rape of Belgium.
It is like the renaming of German shepherd dogs as Alsatians, as happened in the rampant anti-German hysteria in 1914.
Otherwise every spivvy City trader who has made good would be deemed to be a thief and have their property confiscated. Which would be ghastly, wouldn't it.
Even in the context of wartime repression, this is astonishing – it basically likens Facebook to al-Qaeda.
https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1502253590815154179
I think I do expect due process in terms of who is or isn't sanctioned and as much public information as practicable as to reasons beyond he's Russian or he's an oligarch.
I know one of the complaints about Russian oligarchs is their aggressive and proactive use of the UK law courts to obscure their links. I guess a side effect of sanctions may be to reduce the ability to use their billions in such a way.
I'm not against sanctioning Abramovic, I'm simply not in a position to know.
Anyway, Perhaps you may be able to help the Chelsea glitterati with their directions.
"I'll have three lies about a hospital bombing and another about a dungeon under an American pizza shop."
"Sure, that'll be three computer chips and a Big Mac."
By calling for him to be sanctioned - with no specific evidence - Labour gave the government complete cover to just do it.
It is a sad town that has fallen on hard & desperate times.
A million miles away from Chelsea and glitter.
Incidentally I don't remember them ever being as popular as they seem to be now.
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/nag7zbuivl/YouGov - Ukraine refugees 28 Feb -1 Mar.pdf
It anchors people by absurdly giving - to the 76% of people who have already said they do want Britain to offer to "resettle" some refugees - the first option as "fewer than a hundred" (an option chosen by 0% of those people). So it's actually surprising as many as 20% chose the *highest* option offered of "a few hundreds of thousands".
And if in desperation Putin uses chemicals, then we'll be in the 'something must be done' zone again.
That's a cheery Friday afternoon thought for you...
I also think the Lab outright majority is a lay at 5. The fences they have to jump to reach that are Aintree level.
They’d raised some money for the Ukrainian army and then changed their mind and decided to give it to humanitarian causes instead, using this logic.
Putin's advisors would be able to work that one out.
Hong Kong’s Hospital Authority has asked the public to understand its difficulties with saturated mortuaries amid the city’s Covid-19 crisis, as an image of bodies lying next to living patients on a hospital ward surfaced online.
https://hongkongfp.com/2022/03/11/covid-19-hong-kong-hospital-authority-urges-understanding-as-shocking-photo-emerges-of-bodies-stored-on-ward/
https://twitter.com/tomgrundy/status/1502229988481052674
That's not to say They will not try something, they properly will, but its more likely to be cyber attacks or something else we have not seen before IMHO
V. important paper published in the Lancet - the first peer-reviewed global estimates of excess deaths (the most reliable way to compare Covid deaths) over first 2 years of pandemic with findings that will surprise many & correct five widespread misconceptions / assumptions:
1/9
1. Far from the UK having the worst death rate in Europe (or even Western Europe) as many still think, it is actually 29th in Europe & 9th in Western Europe - below the Western European average & at the same level as France & Germany (no statistically significant difference)....
3. England hasn't had a higher death rate than other home nations: all are basically the same level with no statistically significant difference:
England: 125.8 (122.1 - 128.7)
Northern Ireland: 131.8 (101.6 - 165.0)
Scotland: 130.6 (115.7 - 145.1)
Wales: 135.5 (121.9 - 147.5)
https://twitter.com/drraghibali/status/1502227968353091585?s=20&t=84-YVzgUiv7w0k_h16BGSA
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02796-3/fulltext