Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
No comprehensive should be "bog standard". They should all be excellent.
I shouldn't have mentioned that my children went to an RC school (they, nor me are Catholic by the way). I fell into your faith school trap. Damn and blast!
What a ludicrous statement. You may as well say 'no supermarkets should be bog standard. They should all be excellent.'
The only way you get to excellence is consumer choice. Applies to education as much as business. Otherwise if there was no choice of supermarket, every supermarket would look like an Asda or Morrisons on a bad day
I don't know how they got into an RC school without being Catholic. Most faith schools require at least a minimum level of church attendance to get in '
Nope my children went to a C of E school and we are atheists.
Also this consumer choice stuff you talk of; earlier you wanted state controlled energy pricing for oil companies. Make up your mind, do you want competition or state control.
You can just about get into a C of E primary school or an average faith school if you only live in the parish.
The top faith secondary schools however almost all require a high level of church attendance to get into them as they are very oversubscribed.
I was not proposing to nationalise all energy companies was I, which Corbyn would have done. Just requiring them to pass on lower energy prices to UK consumers as energy supply was expanded in the UK
I never said you were. I said you said state control of prices, which is what you are proposing. That is price fixing below the market price. How on earth you think that will work. I have no idea when there will be in parallel market priced fuel. Is the govt going to subsidize all imports? I assume not so the same fuel will have 2 different prices. How does that work? Maybe like Cuba where you get vouchers for some stuff and other stuff is at market rates. I could go on. Trade negotiations and deals for instance would be buggered. Fortunately we have Brexited because that would have been illegal. What about the oil companies. Why would they bother in the UK if the price is below the market price.
You say these things but have no idea.
No it wasn't, I said expand energy production including fracking and shale to increase supply thus reducing prices. Then force energy companies to pass those price cuts on.
That will have to happen not just here but across the world if governments are not to be thrown out of office over sky high energy prices by angry voters
You are just making stuff up now. You specifically said increasing production in the UK to reduce prices. When it was pointed out that it is a global commodity so you wouldn't get lower prices in the UK you said you would force the UK companies to sell their oil at a lower price than the global price. That can't be done for the reasons already stated.
True it would work if global production increased but that is not what you said originally. You specifically said to achieve this you just referred to just UK activity and specific UK price fixing.
Yes, increasing production here and globally will reduce energy prices. Indeed a government which expands fracking and shale production in the UK would expect energy prices to come down as a result and could tax the profits of the companies which do not pass on lower prices. Starmer has already made clear a Labour government will indeed impose a windfall tax on any excess profits being made by oil and gas companies in the UK when energy prices are rising
You still don't get commodity pricing do you:
a) The oil companies do not set the price, the market does. It is not a case of not passing it on. It sells at the market price, so this nonsense of taxing companies extra who don't pass it on is just that, nonsense as it is not within their control.
b) Increasing fracking in the UK has practically no impact on global prices so prices won't come down. Of course it will if global production increased BUT you didn't say that. You were specifically talking about the UK only initially. You said 'we', you referred to UK fracking, you referred to UK coal mines, you referred to Starmer. This is all UK.
c) You then referred to the UK companies having to pass on a price reduction, whatever that means. As pointed out by myself and others that is impossible in a global market place. It is only possible in authoritarian states typically communist where pricing can be state controlled internally ignoring the true market.
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
Faith schools, my arse. Shut them down. I want children to be taught, not indoctrinated in superstitious mumbo-jumbo.
Tough, you are not in power. We Conservatives are. Even Blair recognised how good most faith schools were, so sent his children to them
Yes, I'm with Sandy and everyone else here. One, on principle. If you want to teach your children that there is a God and all the other tenets of your faith, go ahead, I suppose, but I don't see why I should get to pay for it. Two, in practice. There are faith (primary) schools in Sale, and they are consistently the worst performing - presumably because they are taking up teaching time with teaching religion.
I also find it faintly weird and not a little discomfiting that my kids' nominally secular primary schools still have hymns and prayers in assembly. Surely in the secular sector pretty much no-one believes in any of it: it's just a massive exercise in pointlessly going through the motions. I suppose that's some sort of training for life.
I remember when I was at primary school 30-40 years ago it was a charade back then too. A supply teacher joined us for a bit who was clearly a true believer, and seemed genuinely shocked by the inability of a hall full of junior school children to fully partake in care about the state mandated act of worship. She gave us all a good bollocking, of the extent to rouse the normally indiffernt headteacher from her study to see what was going on. The headteacher was as nonplussed as the rest of us with the supply teacher's explanation of 'they're begrudging God ten minutes of their day'. I'm sure the line 'for pity's sake, woman, can't you see we're just going through the motions here' was earnestly fought back in favour of whatever non-commital platitude actually came out.
I'm not seeking to pick a fight with the genuinely religious. But forcing religion on kids seems wrong. And teachers who don't believe forcing religion on kids who don't believe seems stupid and pointless.
I can't really see what there is to object to about a rousing chorus of 'We plough the fields and scatter' or 'Morning has broken'. It's nice. Replacing such classics with limp, anodyne dirges about picking up litter (as was happening toward the end of my time at primary) seems a backward step, regardless of belief.
Well that sounds amusingly stupid too.
Remembering further, we had two hymn books, an orange one and a blue one. The orange one had hymns you might recognise, the blue one was probably a bit more right-on - several of the hymns could probably be subtitled 'don't be racist, kids'. The blue one was used increasingly often as I went through the school. We were possibly going down the same route as you. I'd question the need to sing (or indeed pray) at all. I recognise the psychological impact of communal singing, and can probably understand the thinking behind it - if indeed there is any - but the psychological impact only works if it's a song that people want to sing. It works in gigs where people ar really, really, esctatically into the music; it works in football crowds where crowds genuinely believe, at least right then and there, that Stockport County, Stockport County FC are by far the greatest team the world has ever seen; it works in churches where people go voluntarily to express their belief. It works with drunks. It does not work with a bunch of slightly embarassed and resentful ten year olds who do not believe the words they are singing and feel ridiculous doing so. You can overcome this a bit, if the song is really, really good - you can emotionally believe in the melody even if you don't rationally believe in the words - but really, really good most primary school hymns are not.
Excellent post. I'm certain that singing in schools spoils singing for many people. It's quite an achievement to turn a natural and pleasurable activity into such a fucking grind but amazingly it happens. And in this case, we can pin the blame squarely on religious types. No 13 year old wants to sing Gloria in Excelsis Deo at 8.30 on a Monday morning. What on earth is wrong with the people that would make them do that?
Some of the greatest music ever written is hymns, what a ridiculous post
I happen to like The Proclaimers, but I wouldn't make you sing it joylessly every morning. Making people sing hymns every day is like FGM for the soul.
Hence as I said all faith schools should be mainly restricted to those who regularly attend church services or Mosques or Synagogue and actually have an interest in religion.
Everyone else can attend secular state or private schools without morning worship or hymns.
Except, I think, nominally secular schools still have a mandated act of worship. At least, my kids' schools do, and they are certainly not CofE schools.
In nominal terms but parents can withdraw their children from it and OFSTED do not monitor it
This is a definite theme now. Turkish food is terrible. Way worse than, say, Germany or Holland (the worst in western Europe)
It’s down there with a middle income African country or somewhere like Oman
It is shite. In Erdogan’s gleaming Istanbul airport at their flashy Italian restaurant I ordered the Caprese salad. It came as cold sliced tomato with weird tasteless frigid bits of cheese, and chopped lettuce. That was it. No dressing, no nothing, No oil, no pepper, no salt. Zero. No pesto or basil. Disgusting
Not only was it dreadfully bad, the staff had no idea WHY it was bad, when I politely queried
It was like eating in an eerie, hallucinated version of 70s Britain, yet in a huge sparkly airport
In Sanliurfa the Head of Regional Culture and Tourism took me to a celebrated restaurant for their famous liver kebab. It was nice bits of liver, in a kebab, with an OK sauce. That was it. You could eat it in Camden at 3am after a big night and think Hmm, decent fast food. And they were trying to show off???
UGHHHHHHH
I haven't eaten in Turkey, but I was surprised at how bad the food was in Copenhagen (2018). What's the story with putting massive dollops of butter onto everything?
Posh Danish food is now world class. But everything beneath is still catching up (in Denmark)
Germany, Holland and the rest of Scandi are notably behind.
Britain is no longer the laggard, you can now eat better in the UK than most European countries (and certainly most countries around the world)
Spain, Italy and France are still superior to the UK. Tho Britain is edging France because of our better world cuisine, and insane French attachment to the Great Tradition
Nonetheless I’d have those three in the European Superleague, and Britain at the top of the next division, ahead of Greece and Portugal
How do you rate the great State of Louisiana?
Magnificent. The only state in the USA where I have eaten brilliant food, day after day
And it’s not just a New Orleans thing. The food in Louisiana outside NOLA is unusually excellent, even down to the breakfasts
Food culture is a weird thing. But Louisiana has it, and delivers it
I found Atlanta, Georgia, bizarrely good.
Absolute awful city in almost every way - except its food scene, which is weirdly great.
Generally the States can be disappointing for food.
You can eat really really well in most states of the US, but like so much of the US, its a place of two extremes. The "average" is absolutely shocking.
They haven’t had the gastropub Revolution that has happened in the UK and Australia, and which has been crucial
There will be at least one place in any average town with a talented chef who knows what he wants to do, and is having a bash
I saw a documentary on Australian food and they ascribed their food Revolution, almost entirely, to immigration but even more to foodie TV like Masterchef (which was invented in the UK but is wildly popular in its Aussie incarnation).
It makes total sense. Many millions watch Masterchef, pro and amateur. Watching a series is basically like doing a GCSE in cookery. You learn when to baste and how to fillet. You have a go. It’s brilliant. Most people I know, friends and family, can cook well - anyone under 60, that is
One thing that has improved a lot in the US over past 20 years is craft beer....they really gone for that. Its just the same place that will serve you a half decent beer brewed on site or locally, will serve you a meh burger and fries.
Not sure about your tv point. Don't the US have a load of shows just like that, Iron Chef etc, that are equally popular?
Agreed on the beer. American beer selections are now generally better than British. I hear rumours they are improving their cheese as well (it can’t get worse)
But the Masterchef thing is real. Australia has a less atomized culture than the USA, as does Britain
Eg Masterchef gets 5-6m viewers in the UK, thats nearly 10% of the entire country. The us version gets 1m, 0.3%
10% of people tuning in to learn about cooking is enough to change a cooking culture. 0.3% isn’t. And this is repeated over 30 years, beginning in the UK in 1990
American cheese has improved in just the four (almost) five years I've been here. As has their salami.
But it's still not as good as the UK.
France is still le grand fromage.
Corsica and Sardinia have the best cheese in the world. Esp Corsica. Tho Sardinia has the maggot cheese
Corsica is just incredible.You can drive 5km (which takes an hour on their roads) and the next village (which hates the previous village) has an entirely different and vastly superior cheese, and if you demur they all glare at you then turn away like you are a shameful sexual leper
After that they start being rude
Honestly tho the cheese is remarkable. And much of it never leaves the island
However in terms of getting great cheese in your average supermarket I reckon the UK wins, easily. We have all the noble British cheeses plus all the best mainland Europe cheeses, you just don’t get that selection in the EU (they all concentrate on their own cheeses)
The USA might be slowly catching up because they are now winning cheese awards, the same process as happened with their craft beer
However i reckon they are still 20 years behind the curve, so a long way to go, plus they have a culture more resistant to weird foods than better beers
British cheese is a revelation. When I was a kid you could get several different sorts of Cheddar, plus Stilton at Christmas.
Confession: after trying all the cheeses of the world, sometimes given to me by the world cheese award winning cheese makers themselves, I have come to the conclusion that Colston Basset Stiltion, as served by my local Whole Foods in Camden, really is the best cheese in the world. The King of Cheeses
Unctuous, creamy, rich, intense, memorable, full of umami, just amazing
And i have had Holy Goat served to me by nuns in Victoria, Australia
It’s certainly the best blue cheese in the world. Only rivalled by Stichelton (which is perhaps cheating).
I do find the general Francophobia wearying though. You can go to remote Alpine passes in France and find a cheese shop that serves two dozen or more cheeses.
Good quality is generally excellent in both France and Japan, even if Paris is not what what it was.
The same is certainly not true of Britain. Although I rate British food much higher than the average world citizen, it’s just very hard to get very good food much outside London without some decent planning, with the possible exception of the West Country.
The USA is, food speaking, a fucking nuclear wasteland.
Have you never visited New Orleans? Start of the morning with cafe au lait & beignets at Cafe du Monde (the one down the street from Lafayette Sq) then graze on from there . . .
I’m have, I have. New Orleans and Louisiana are exceptional. I agree with the general sentiments on this thread.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year in the UK, Sky Studios have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
That isn't to say they don't fund some interesting films, but its just totally dwarfed by what the big boys are now investing in UK tv and film production.
Personally, I think Comte is the very best hard cheese, but I would point out too that Cheddar is internationally ubiquitous, and the very best Cheddar comes from England, too.
i agree on the hard cheese of the Alpine foothills. Magical
Tho for melting purposes, a very extreme Cheddar is heard to beat. Cornish Cove, say
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year in the UK, Sky Studios have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
That isn't to say they don't fund some interesting films, but its just totally dwarfed by what the big boys are now investing in UK tv and film production.
Netflix and the rest have a smell of never mind the quality, feel the width.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios. £30 million quid is the what Netflix spends of a handful episodes of the Crown.
I’m eating the Toblerone from my minibar, because the food in Izmir is so bad
Why stay there? Only an hour down the road to Selcuk to see Ephesus. Perfectly good restaurants there.
Or push on to Kusadasi for some wonderful seafront fish restaurants.
But the sea is right here. I can view it from my hotel
I do wonder if the terrible inflation crisis is making yer generally mediocre Turkish food much worse than normal
Turkish food is never great, It has always been overrated by its fans (like Lebanese). I’ve been here too many times and been sorely disappointed.
But this is a new level of dire
I liked Ephesus, but was more impressed at looking down on the River Menderes (Maiandros in Greek) and twigging the origin of the English verb.
Any recommendations of how to do Ephesus? 3 hours enough? Avoid local bars? Take a flask of arak?
These days my culture ceiling runs at about 60-90 minutes, and I was in Ephesus a long while ago. So perhaps not the person to ask.
I think the Library is the main thing, and the museum and amphitheatre. Then the rest is just wandering around to breath in the scale of things. You will probably have seen way better ruins. But it is nice to sit down with a Turkish tea or coffee and take in the surroundings.
I don’t understand Labours bounce in polls, it’s been weeks since political ding dong at the budget, where Labour did respond quite well, and was worse received budget in media for more than a decade. It must be like people say, takes a couple of weeks to properly impact in polls.
To quote the great Dominic Cummings, most voters interact with politics as if it were on a TV behind the bar in a sports bar whilst Wrestlemania is on. Some stories impact slowly, many don't impact at all.
The changes in the media landscape haven't helped. The days when newspapers sold 4 or 5 million copies, or when 10 million watched News at Ten, are long gone.
We're not going back to a world where people could be corralled into watching a reasonably thorough review of the day's news because there were only four channels. Indeed, we don't really want to (do we?) But the change has come at a cost.
We were talking about TV viewing yesterday, so I looked the figures up. News at Six still gets 4-5 million a day, only outpaced by the soaps:
But as you'd expect, it's very much an age thing. Oldies watch around 6 hours a day of broadcast TV (though I suspect a lot of that is just having it on the background), whereas the 16-24 group only watch about an hour a day (which is more than people here were saying yesterday). The national average is still 3 hours a day:
What is the methodology they use to ascertain these break down for age / watching time figures?
It seems to be a mixture of an Ipsos-Mori poll and actual installation of a meter. Participants are not paid but are"thanked" (how British) and get gift vouchers. I wonder if the elaborate process introduces a bias to people who can be bothered with it (but you could say the same about YouGov and other panels and they seem to work).
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
Faith schools, my arse. Shut them down. I want children to be taught, not indoctrinated in superstitious mumbo-jumbo.
Tough, you are not in power. We Conservatives are. Even Blair recognised how good most faith schools were, so sent his children to them
Yes, I'm with Sandy and everyone else here. One, on principle. If you want to teach your children that there is a God and all the other tenets of your faith, go ahead, I suppose, but I don't see why I should get to pay for it. Two, in practice. There are faith (primary) schools in Sale, and they are consistently the worst performing - presumably because they are taking up teaching time with teaching religion.
I also find it faintly weird and not a little discomfiting that my kids' nominally secular primary schools still have hymns and prayers in assembly. Surely in the secular sector pretty much no-one believes in any of it: it's just a massive exercise in pointlessly going through the motions. I suppose that's some sort of training for life.
I remember when I was at primary school 30-40 years ago it was a charade back then too. A supply teacher joined us for a bit who was clearly a true believer, and seemed genuinely shocked by the inability of a hall full of junior school children to fully partake in care about the state mandated act of worship. She gave us all a good bollocking, of the extent to rouse the normally indiffernt headteacher from her study to see what was going on. The headteacher was as nonplussed as the rest of us with the supply teacher's explanation of 'they're begrudging God ten minutes of their day'. I'm sure the line 'for pity's sake, woman, can't you see we're just going through the motions here' was earnestly fought back in favour of whatever non-commital platitude actually came out.
I'm not seeking to pick a fight with the genuinely religious. But forcing religion on kids seems wrong. And teachers who don't believe forcing religion on kids who don't believe seems stupid and pointless.
'Everyone else on here' ie you and him.
However that is of course standard practice of the left, close down anything successful. As we saw earlier in the anti private school sentiment, now the sentiment to shit down successful faith schools and of course mainly Labour councils closing of grammar schools.
Taken to its logical extreme if Corbyn had got in power for an extended period of time he and McConnell would of course here nationalised any successful private company they could too. Including most of the FTSE 100.
One size fits all bog standard education and mass nationalised industry and services. That remains the leftist utopia even if it had to compromise to win elections and get into power.
I also pay taxes for your childrens education. If parents of faith wish to send their children to faith schools they are as entitled to do so as parents of no faith are entitled to send their children to non faith schools.
By selecting for faith schools based on church attendance we can also ensure we keep your children out and non Christian teachers out so they don't have to undertake the prayers and hymns we Christians are committed to. We in turn do not have to send our children to secular assemblies we don't want our children to participate in in non faith schools which your children can attend instead.
'Everyone else on here, ie you and him'
As with nearly ever subject it is you and nobody else. That is fair enough. You are entitled to your opinions and express them on anything and it is great that you do, but you are deluded if you think others are agreeing with you here. Of course you could argue that we aren't typical and you would be correct but your assertion 'you and him' was in fact not 2 people but everyone who responded. It is also worth reflecting that we are a cross section of political views although I appreciate you don't think Tories on here are true Tories and you might be correct that they aren't typical of society. They are generally must more intelligent than the average voter.
Of course I am largely a minority on here because most PBers are secular liberals. Including you. Whereas I am a religious conservative.
However millions of other religious conservatives exist, even here in the UK, a country far more liberal and secular than the global average
I’m standing with you in that minority too as I am a CoE religion and Conservative in my politics too HY.
But I vote Libdem because the Conservative party are right of centre Populists now, like their media support first drifted that way, digging out the roots of a proper Conservative Party.
Maybe you are in tune with this Populist unConservative nonsense and prefer it, or the penny hadn’t dropped for you yet.
On faith schools LDs are at least rather more tolerant of schools for people of faith than the left of Labour certainly
This Libdem is certainly on message with Libdem policy and HY on Faith schools. Religion plays an important role in socialisation, instilling the difference between right and wrong imo, but so much more, it helps to build aware and resilient people, and through charity work in your teens you can be born into a tribe in a way that is overlooked how important it is to have a social consciousness.
Having been in this room for about six months now, it strikes my how many posters who I first knew from very anti government posts are actually Conservative voters, even members and canvassers in past, but lapsed (apart from holding their nose to rightly keep Corbyn out). That could so easily have been me.
I realise now I also stand with them HY. There is a difference between us in your not calling out this government for what it is. Wether you like what it is or not, there should be the acknowledgement it is not conservatism.
As a proper Conservative I reject all forms of populism. Populism pushes the idea of popular sovereignty above the independence of democratic institutions, and the professionalism of the representatives of those institutions. Where populism doesn’t like government, politics or politicians, as true Conservatives we will oppose that populism. There are always divisions of interest and opinion, but itis duty of all democratic politicians to take account of them. This means there is a legitimacy to all opposition, and your opponents and their opinions, in politics, or in the press, deserve respect. But we have a government and leadership who operate with such disregard for the checks and balances of democratic structure, ignoring or circumventing wherever they can.
I believe, if Tugendhat or anyone wants to run from the back benches against Boris and his cronies, building their bid on the paragraph I just gave them, Big Dog goes the way of the Dodo.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
No comprehensive should be "bog standard". They should all be excellent.
I shouldn't have mentioned that my children went to an RC school (they, nor me are Catholic by the way). I fell into your faith school trap. Damn and blast!
What a ludicrous statement. You may as well say 'no supermarkets should be bog standard. They should all be excellent.'
The only way you get to excellence is consumer choice. Applies to education as much as business. Otherwise if there was no choice of supermarket, every supermarket would look like an Asda or Morrisons on a bad day
I don't know how they got into an RC school without being Catholic. Most faith schools require at least a minimum level of church attendance to get in '
None taken!
Supermarkets are not funded out of the public purse for the future benefit of the nation. If they are poor they wither and die. With publicly funded schools it doesn't quite work like that.
And I didn't furtively pretend to be the Pope to get them in. The school knew I was a godless heathen.
If state schools are inadequate they get rebranded as academies, if private schools are inadequate they go out of business.
Either way, they do not go on as before.
Sounds an unusual faith school anyway. The C of E faith school in Loughton for example awards points based on weekly church attendance. The more you attend, the more points you get regardless of how close you live to the school in the district. That is normally standard for most faith schools, C of E or RC. It gets 81% A* to C GCSE grades or the new points equivalent.
Your first paragraph reminds me of Lennie Henry's suggestion that "Windscale has been renamed as Sellarfield, so nuclear fallout would now be known as magic moonbeams".
That was Not The Nine O’Clock News - Mel Smith, Pam S, et al. not Lenny Henry
From ChemEurope.com
"Not the Nine O'Clock News also had a sketch, with a nod to a popular Ready Brek advert, about glowing children and Sellafield".
And
"Comedian Lenny Henry, impersonating newscaster Trevor McDonald, once reported that "Windscale is to be renamed Sellafield, because it sounds nicer. In future, radiation will be referred to as magic moonbeams".
Yes, the internet’s memory is different to mine. If so, my bad
(The weird thing is I can DISTINCTLY recall SEEING Pamela Stephenson make this joke, in my mind, how odd are the tricks of recall)
Memory is strange. Hence Mandela Effect. Strangely I had that when FW de Klerk died. Which I hope both would have found bleakly amusing. On which. How come I missed Tiger Woods nearly dying in a car crash? I have no memory whatsoever of that happening. And I read this board every day.
Exactly the same! Car crash?? Nearly fatal? What????
Was it during Covid? I think we all lost years of memory during Covid. Because we wanted to
Apparently it was 23 Feb 2021. I only know because apparently he is thinking of miraculously playing at the Masters this weekend. I have no memory of this whatsoever. Not an, oh yeah, forgot about that. But none. At all. I'm sure I was following the news. Glad it isn't just me. What else have we edited out?
We are all experiencing this. The brain is editing out this horrific collective memory, because it is so sad and repellent, but in doing this we are also erasing coincidental events, non-plague-related
I believe @SeanT once of this parish, anticipated this phenomenon.
A very prescient article, in retrospect, from May 2020. His extraordinary wisdom is much missed, or, indeed, just forgotten. What was his other name?
People who no longer, according to yesterday's thread, watch the news but instead rely on Twitter or other social media, miss stories. Colour me unsurprised.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year in the UK, Sky Studios have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
That isn't to say they don't fund some interesting films, but its just totally dwarfed by what the big boys are now investing in UK tv and film production.
Netflix and the rest have a smell of never mind the quality, feel the width.
Yes and no. Yes there has definitely been a rush to create lots of content to paid their catalogue, but the likes of Crown is absolutely they mind the quality. Same with Slow Horses on Apple+, that is after two episodes, is 100% clear they very very picky about the quality, top actors, great script, high production values.
All these companies need the high quality blue chip stuff to get people to sign-up and continue their subscriptions. Then yes they have some filler to try and make sure people default to using it when they come in the house.
This is a definite theme now. Turkish food is terrible. Way worse than, say, Germany or Holland (the worst in western Europe)
It’s down there with a middle income African country or somewhere like Oman
It is shite. In Erdogan’s gleaming Istanbul airport at their flashy Italian restaurant I ordered the Caprese salad. It came as cold sliced tomato with weird tasteless frigid bits of cheese, and chopped lettuce. That was it. No dressing, no nothing, No oil, no pepper, no salt. Zero. No pesto or basil. Disgusting
Not only was it dreadfully bad, the staff had no idea WHY it was bad, when I politely queried
It was like eating in an eerie, hallucinated version of 70s Britain, yet in a huge sparkly airport
In Sanliurfa the Head of Regional Culture and Tourism took me to a celebrated restaurant for their famous liver kebab. It was nice bits of liver, in a kebab, with an OK sauce. That was it. You could eat it in Camden at 3am after a big night and think Hmm, decent fast food. And they were trying to show off???
UGHHHHHHH
I haven't eaten in Turkey, but I was surprised at how bad the food was in Copenhagen (2018). What's the story with putting massive dollops of butter onto everything?
Posh Danish food is now world class. But everything beneath is still catching up (in Denmark)
Germany, Holland and the rest of Scandi are notably behind.
Britain is no longer the laggard, you can now eat better in the UK than most European countries (and certainly most countries around the world)
Spain, Italy and France are still superior to the UK. Tho Britain is edging France because of our better world cuisine, and insane French attachment to the Great Tradition
Nonetheless I’d have those three in the European Superleague, and Britain at the top of the next division, ahead of Greece and Portugal
How do you rate the great State of Louisiana?
Magnificent. The only state in the USA where I have eaten brilliant food, day after day
And it’s not just a New Orleans thing. The food in Louisiana outside NOLA is unusually excellent, even down to the breakfasts
Food culture is a weird thing. But Louisiana has it, and delivers it
I found Atlanta, Georgia, bizarrely good.
Absolute awful city in almost every way - except its food scene, which is weirdly great.
Generally the States can be disappointing for food.
You can eat really really well in most states of the US, but like so much of the US, its a place of two extremes. The "average" is absolutely shocking.
They haven’t had the gastropub Revolution that has happened in the UK and Australia, and which has been crucial
There will be at least one place in any average town with a talented chef who knows what he wants to do, and is having a bash
I saw a documentary on Australian food and they ascribed their food Revolution, almost entirely, to immigration but even more to foodie TV like Masterchef (which was invented in the UK but is wildly popular in its Aussie incarnation).
It makes total sense. Many millions watch Masterchef, pro and amateur. Watching a series is basically like doing a GCSE in cookery. You learn when to baste and how to fillet. You have a go. It’s brilliant. Most people I know, friends and family, can cook well - anyone under 60, that is
One thing that has improved a lot in the US over past 20 years is craft beer....they really gone for that. Its just the same place that will serve you a half decent beer brewed on site or locally, will serve you a meh burger and fries.
Not sure about your tv point. Don't the US have a load of shows just like that, Iron Chef etc, that are equally popular?
Agreed on the beer. American beer selections are now generally better than British. I hear rumours they are improving their cheese as well (it can’t get worse)
But the Masterchef thing is real. Australia has a less atomized culture than the USA, as does Britain
Eg Masterchef gets 5-6m viewers in the UK, thats nearly 10% of the entire country. The us version gets 1m, 0.3%
10% of people tuning in to learn about cooking is enough to change a cooking culture. 0.3% isn’t. And this is repeated over 30 years, beginning in the UK in 1990
American cheese has improved in just the four (almost) five years I've been here. As has their salami.
But it's still not as good as the UK.
France is still le grand fromage.
Corsica and Sardinia have the best cheese in the world. Esp Corsica. Tho Sardinia has the maggot cheese
Corsica is just incredible.You can drive 5km (which takes an hour on their roads) and the next village (which hates the previous village) has an entirely different and vastly superior cheese, and if you demur they all glare at you then turn away like you are a shameful sexual leper
After that they start being rude
Honestly tho the cheese is remarkable. And much of it never leaves the island
However in terms of getting great cheese in your average supermarket I reckon the UK wins, easily. We have all the noble British cheeses plus all the best mainland Europe cheeses, you just don’t get that selection in the EU (they all concentrate on their own cheeses)
The USA might be slowly catching up because they are now winning cheese awards, the same process as happened with their craft beer
However i reckon they are still 20 years behind the curve, so a long way to go, plus they have a culture more resistant to weird foods than better beers
British cheese is a revelation. When I was a kid you could get several different sorts of Cheddar, plus Stilton at Christmas.
Confession: after trying all the cheeses of the world, sometimes given to me by the world cheese award winning cheese makers themselves, I have come to the conclusion that Colston Basset Stiltion, as served by my local Whole Foods in Camden, really is the best cheese in the world. The King of Cheeses
Unctuous, creamy, rich, intense, memorable, full of umami, just amazing
And i have had Holy Goat served to me by nuns in Victoria, Australia
It’s certainly the best blue cheese in the world. Only rivalled by Stichelton (which is perhaps cheating).
I do find the general Francophobia wearying though. You can go to remote Alpine passes in France and find a cheese shop that serves two dozen or more cheeses.
Good quality is generally excellent in both France and Japan, even if Paris is not what what it was.
The same is certainly not true of Britain. Although I rate British food much higher than the average world citizen, it’s just very hard to get very good food much outside London without some decent planning, with the possible exception of the West Country.
The USA is, food speaking, a fucking nuclear wasteland.
Have you never visited New Orleans? Start of the morning with cafe au lait & beignets at Cafe du Monde (the one down the street from Lafayette Sq) then graze on from there . . .
I’m have, I have. New Orleans and Louisiana are exceptional. I agree with the general sentiments on this thread.
I’m talking about the USA en masse.
You have a point. Though possible to find good eats in every state, esp. IF you're lucky.
Among strange examples, the best Italian sandwich (hoggie/grinder) I've ever enjoyed, was in a small local chain Italian restaurant in Ironton, Ohio. A place barely noted - and certainly NOT for fine dining!
Must be some gems tucked away in odd corners of Gotham, certainly to compete with Appalachia?
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
No comprehensive should be "bog standard". They should all be excellent.
I shouldn't have mentioned that my children went to an RC school (they, nor me are Catholic by the way). I fell into your faith school trap. Damn and blast!
What a ludicrous statement. You may as well say 'no supermarkets should be bog standard. They should all be excellent.'
The only way you get to excellence is consumer choice. Applies to education as much as business. Otherwise if there was no choice of supermarket, every supermarket would look like an Asda or Morrisons on a bad day
I don't know how they got into an RC school without being Catholic. Most faith schools require at least a minimum level of church attendance to get in '
Nope my children went to a C of E school and we are atheists.
Also this consumer choice stuff you talk of; earlier you wanted state controlled energy pricing for oil companies. Make up your mind, do you want competition or state control.
You can just about get into a C of E primary school or an average faith school if you only live in the parish.
The top faith secondary schools however almost all require a high level of church attendance to get into them as they are very oversubscribed.
I was not proposing to nationalise all energy companies was I, which Corbyn would have done. Just requiring them to pass on lower energy prices to UK consumers as energy supply was expanded in the UK
I never said you were. I said you said state control of prices, which is what you are proposing. That is price fixing below the market price. How on earth you think that will work. I have no idea when there will be in parallel market priced fuel. Is the govt going to subsidize all imports? I assume not so the same fuel will have 2 different prices. How does that work? Maybe like Cuba where you get vouchers for some stuff and other stuff is at market rates. I could go on. Trade negotiations and deals for instance would be buggered. Fortunately we have Brexited because that would have been illegal. What about the oil companies. Why would they bother in the UK if the price is below the market price.
You say these things but have no idea.
No it wasn't, I said expand energy production including fracking and shale to increase supply thus reducing prices. Then force energy companies to pass those price cuts on.
That will have to happen not just here but across the world if governments are not to be thrown out of office over sky high energy prices by angry voters
You are just making stuff up now. You specifically said increasing production in the UK to reduce prices. When it was pointed out that it is a global commodity so you wouldn't get lower prices in the UK you said you would force the UK companies to sell their oil at a lower price than the global price. That can't be done for the reasons already stated.
True it would work if global production increased but that is not what you said originally. You specifically said to achieve this you just referred to just UK activity and specific UK price fixing.
Yes, increasing production here and globally will reduce energy prices. Indeed a government which expands fracking and shale production in the UK would expect energy prices to come down as a result and could tax the profits of the companies which do not pass on lower prices. Starmer has already made clear a Labour government will indeed impose a windfall tax on any excess profits being made by oil and gas companies in the UK when energy prices are rising
You still don't get commodity pricing do you:
a) The oil companies do not set the price, the market does. It is not a case of not passing it on. It sells at the market price, so this nonsense of taxing companies extra who don't pass it on is just that, nonsense as it is not within their control.
b) Increasing fracking in the UK has practically no impact on global prices so prices won't come down. Of course it will if global production increased BUT you didn't say that. You were specifically talking about the UK only initially. You said 'we', you referred to UK fracking, you referred to UK coal mines, you referred to Starmer. This is all UK.
c) You then referred to the UK companies having to pass on a price reduction, whatever that means. As pointed out by myself and others that is impossible in a global market place. It is only possible in authoritarian states typically communist where pricing can be state controlled internally ignoring the true market.
a) Well that is EXACTLY what a Starmer government has said it will do if elected ie impose a windfall tax on the profits of all oil and gas companies in the UK which do not cut energy prices. So tough, if you get a Labour government that is what it will do.
b) Increased fracking in the UK obviously increases supply in the UK and that will in turn have some impact on cutting prices in the UK. Though yes we need more fracking and shale extraction globally for a major difference.
I’m eating the Toblerone from my minibar, because the food in Izmir is so bad
Why stay there? Only an hour down the road to Selcuk to see Ephesus. Perfectly good restaurants there.
Or push on to Kusadasi for some wonderful seafront fish restaurants.
But the sea is right here. I can view it from my hotel
I do wonder if the terrible inflation crisis is making yer generally mediocre Turkish food much worse than normal
Turkish food is never great, It has always been overrated by its fans (like Lebanese). I’ve been here too many times and been sorely disappointed.
But this is a new level of dire
I liked Ephesus, but was more impressed at looking down on the River Menderes (Maiandros in Greek) and twigging the origin of the English verb.
Any recommendations of how to do Ephesus? 3 hours enough? Avoid local bars? Take a flask of arak?
These days my culture ceiling runs at about 60-90 minutes, and I was in Ephesus a long while ago. So perhaps not the person to ask.
I think the Library is the main thing, and the museum and amphitheatre. Then the rest is just wandering around to breath in the scale of things. You will probably have seen way better ruins. But it is nice to sit down with a Turkish tea or coffee and take in the surroundings.
This is a definite theme now. Turkish food is terrible. Way worse than, say, Germany or Holland (the worst in western Europe)
It’s down there with a middle income African country or somewhere like Oman
It is shite. In Erdogan’s gleaming Istanbul airport at their flashy Italian restaurant I ordered the Caprese salad. It came as cold sliced tomato with weird tasteless frigid bits of cheese, and chopped lettuce. That was it. No dressing, no nothing, No oil, no pepper, no salt. Zero. No pesto or basil. Disgusting
Not only was it dreadfully bad, the staff had no idea WHY it was bad, when I politely queried
It was like eating in an eerie, hallucinated version of 70s Britain, yet in a huge sparkly airport
In Sanliurfa the Head of Regional Culture and Tourism took me to a celebrated restaurant for their famous liver kebab. It was nice bits of liver, in a kebab, with an OK sauce. That was it. You could eat it in Camden at 3am after a big night and think Hmm, decent fast food. And they were trying to show off???
UGHHHHHHH
I haven't eaten in Turkey, but I was surprised at how bad the food was in Copenhagen (2018). What's the story with putting massive dollops of butter onto everything?
Posh Danish food is now world class. But everything beneath is still catching up (in Denmark)
Germany, Holland and the rest of Scandi are notably behind.
Britain is no longer the laggard, you can now eat better in the UK than most European countries (and certainly most countries around the world)
Spain, Italy and France are still superior to the UK. Tho Britain is edging France because of our better world cuisine, and insane French attachment to the Great Tradition
Nonetheless I’d have those three in the European Superleague, and Britain at the top of the next division, ahead of Greece and Portugal
How do you rate the great State of Louisiana?
Magnificent. The only state in the USA where I have eaten brilliant food, day after day
And it’s not just a New Orleans thing. The food in Louisiana outside NOLA is unusually excellent, even down to the breakfasts
Food culture is a weird thing. But Louisiana has it, and delivers it
I found Atlanta, Georgia, bizarrely good.
Absolute awful city in almost every way - except its food scene, which is weirdly great.
Generally the States can be disappointing for food.
You can eat really really well in most states of the US, but like so much of the US, its a place of two extremes. The "average" is absolutely shocking.
They haven’t had the gastropub Revolution that has happened in the UK and Australia, and which has been crucial
There will be at least one place in any average town with a talented chef who knows what he wants to do, and is having a bash
I saw a documentary on Australian food and they ascribed their food Revolution, almost entirely, to immigration but even more to foodie TV like Masterchef (which was invented in the UK but is wildly popular in its Aussie incarnation).
It makes total sense. Many millions watch Masterchef, pro and amateur. Watching a series is basically like doing a GCSE in cookery. You learn when to baste and how to fillet. You have a go. It’s brilliant. Most people I know, friends and family, can cook well - anyone under 60, that is
One thing that has improved a lot in the US over past 20 years is craft beer....they really gone for that. Its just the same place that will serve you a half decent beer brewed on site or locally, will serve you a meh burger and fries.
Not sure about your tv point. Don't the US have a load of shows just like that, Iron Chef etc, that are equally popular?
Agreed on the beer. American beer selections are now generally better than British. I hear rumours they are improving their cheese as well (it can’t get worse)
But the Masterchef thing is real. Australia has a less atomized culture than the USA, as does Britain
Eg Masterchef gets 5-6m viewers in the UK, thats nearly 10% of the entire country. The us version gets 1m, 0.3%
10% of people tuning in to learn about cooking is enough to change a cooking culture. 0.3% isn’t. And this is repeated over 30 years, beginning in the UK in 1990
American cheese has improved in just the four (almost) five years I've been here. As has their salami.
But it's still not as good as the UK.
France is still le grand fromage.
Corsica and Sardinia have the best cheese in the world. Esp Corsica. Tho Sardinia has the maggot cheese
Corsica is just incredible.You can drive 5km (which takes an hour on their roads) and the next village (which hates the previous village) has an entirely different and vastly superior cheese, and if you demur they all glare at you then turn away like you are a shameful sexual leper
After that they start being rude
Honestly tho the cheese is remarkable. And much of it never leaves the island
However in terms of getting great cheese in your average supermarket I reckon the UK wins, easily. We have all the noble British cheeses plus all the best mainland Europe cheeses, you just don’t get that selection in the EU (they all concentrate on their own cheeses)
The USA might be slowly catching up because they are now winning cheese awards, the same process as happened with their craft beer
However i reckon they are still 20 years behind the curve, so a long way to go, plus they have a culture more resistant to weird foods than better beers
British cheese is a revelation. When I was a kid you could get several different sorts of Cheddar, plus Stilton at Christmas.
Confession: after trying all the cheeses of the world, sometimes given to me by the world cheese award winning cheese makers themselves, I have come to the conclusion that Colston Basset Stiltion, as served by my local Whole Foods in Camden, really is the best cheese in the world. The King of Cheeses
Unctuous, creamy, rich, intense, memorable, full of umami, just amazing
And i have had Holy Goat served to me by nuns in Victoria, Australia
It’s certainly the best blue cheese in the world. Only rivalled by Stichelton (which is perhaps cheating).
I do find the general Francophobia wearying though. You can go to remote Alpine passes in France and find a cheese shop that serves two dozen or more cheeses.
Good quality is generally excellent in both France and Japan, even if Paris is not what what it was.
The same is certainly not true of Britain. Although I rate British food much higher than the average world citizen, it’s just very hard to get very good food much outside London without some decent planning, with the possible exception of the West Country.
The USA is, food speaking, a fucking nuclear wasteland.
Have you never visited New Orleans? Start of the morning with cafe au lait & beignets at Cafe du Monde (the one down the street from Lafayette Sq) then graze on from there . . .
I’m have, I have. New Orleans and Louisiana are exceptional. I agree with the general sentiments on this thread.
I’m talking about the USA en masse.
You have a point. Though possible to find good eats in every state, esp. IF you're lucky.
Among strange examples, the best Italian sandwich (hoggie/grinder) I've ever enjoyed, was in a small local chain Italian restaurant in Ironton, Ohio. A place barely noted - and certainly NOT for fine dining!
Must be some gems tucked away in odd corners of Gotham, certainly to compete with Appalachia?
If you are in Gotham do drop me a note and we can try to find some!
I’m a bit peeved because I’m on the UWS and it’s not Midtown or Brooklyn which is where most of the good restaurants are these days.
(I used to stay Midtown when I came to NY for work).
Plus I usually have my family with me and the kids wants burger, chicken strips, or something similarly beige.
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
Faith schools, my arse. Shut them down. I want children to be taught, not indoctrinated in superstitious mumbo-jumbo.
Tough, you are not in power. We Conservatives are. Even Blair recognised how good most faith schools were, so sent his children to them
Yes, I'm with Sandy and everyone else here. One, on principle. If you want to teach your children that there is a God and all the other tenets of your faith, go ahead, I suppose, but I don't see why I should get to pay for it. Two, in practice. There are faith (primary) schools in Sale, and they are consistently the worst performing - presumably because they are taking up teaching time with teaching religion.
I also find it faintly weird and not a little discomfiting that my kids' nominally secular primary schools still have hymns and prayers in assembly. Surely in the secular sector pretty much no-one believes in any of it: it's just a massive exercise in pointlessly going through the motions. I suppose that's some sort of training for life.
I remember when I was at primary school 30-40 years ago it was a charade back then too. A supply teacher joined us for a bit who was clearly a true believer, and seemed genuinely shocked by the inability of a hall full of junior school children to fully partake in care about the state mandated act of worship. She gave us all a good bollocking, of the extent to rouse the normally indiffernt headteacher from her study to see what was going on. The headteacher was as nonplussed as the rest of us with the supply teacher's explanation of 'they're begrudging God ten minutes of their day'. I'm sure the line 'for pity's sake, woman, can't you see we're just going through the motions here' was earnestly fought back in favour of whatever non-commital platitude actually came out.
I'm not seeking to pick a fight with the genuinely religious. But forcing religion on kids seems wrong. And teachers who don't believe forcing religion on kids who don't believe seems stupid and pointless.
I can't really see what there is to object to about a rousing chorus of 'We plough the fields and scatter' or 'Morning has broken'. It's nice. Replacing such classics with limp, anodyne dirges about picking up litter (as was happening toward the end of my time at primary) seems a backward step, regardless of belief.
Well that sounds amusingly stupid too.
Remembering further, we had two hymn books, an orange one and a blue one. The orange one had hymns you might recognise, the blue one was probably a bit more right-on - several of the hymns could probably be subtitled 'don't be racist, kids'. The blue one was used increasingly often as I went through the school. We were possibly going down the same route as you. I'd question the need to sing (or indeed pray) at all. I recognise the psychological impact of communal singing, and can probably understand the thinking behind it - if indeed there is any - but the psychological impact only works if it's a song that people want to sing. It works in gigs where people ar really, really, esctatically into the music; it works in football crowds where crowds genuinely believe, at least right then and there, that Stockport County, Stockport County FC are by far the greatest team the world has ever seen; it works in churches where people go voluntarily to express their belief. It works with drunks. It does not work with a bunch of slightly embarassed and resentful ten year olds who do not believe the words they are singing and feel ridiculous doing so. You can overcome this a bit, if the song is really, really good - you can emotionally believe in the melody even if you don't rationally believe in the words - but really, really good most primary school hymns are not.
Again I'll go with the facile, and wonder if anyone else sang "Sing Sultanas" rather than "Sing Hosannas" to the King...
We had 'The Earth is yours Oh Lord, you nouri-SHIT with rain' (emphasis ours).
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
It is a concern. However, having been exposed to a lot of Film4's back catalogue (because I subscribe to Britbox), there's a lot of dross amongst the winners - some of the older stuff nearly unwatchable.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
This is a definite theme now. Turkish food is terrible. Way worse than, say, Germany or Holland (the worst in western Europe)
It’s down there with a middle income African country or somewhere like Oman
It is shite. In Erdogan’s gleaming Istanbul airport at their flashy Italian restaurant I ordered the Caprese salad. It came as cold sliced tomato with weird tasteless frigid bits of cheese, and chopped lettuce. That was it. No dressing, no nothing, No oil, no pepper, no salt. Zero. No pesto or basil. Disgusting
Not only was it dreadfully bad, the staff had no idea WHY it was bad, when I politely queried
It was like eating in an eerie, hallucinated version of 70s Britain, yet in a huge sparkly airport
In Sanliurfa the Head of Regional Culture and Tourism took me to a celebrated restaurant for their famous liver kebab. It was nice bits of liver, in a kebab, with an OK sauce. That was it. You could eat it in Camden at 3am after a big night and think Hmm, decent fast food. And they were trying to show off???
UGHHHHHHH
I haven't eaten in Turkey, but I was surprised at how bad the food was in Copenhagen (2018). What's the story with putting massive dollops of butter onto everything?
Posh Danish food is now world class. But everything beneath is still catching up (in Denmark)
Germany, Holland and the rest of Scandi are notably behind.
Britain is no longer the laggard, you can now eat better in the UK than most European countries (and certainly most countries around the world)
Spain, Italy and France are still superior to the UK. Tho Britain is edging France because of our better world cuisine, and insane French attachment to the Great Tradition
Nonetheless I’d have those three in the European Superleague, and Britain at the top of the next division, ahead of Greece and Portugal
How do you rate the great State of Louisiana?
Magnificent. The only state in the USA where I have eaten brilliant food, day after day
And it’s not just a New Orleans thing. The food in Louisiana outside NOLA is unusually excellent, even down to the breakfasts
Food culture is a weird thing. But Louisiana has it, and delivers it
I found Atlanta, Georgia, bizarrely good.
Absolute awful city in almost every way - except its food scene, which is weirdly great.
Generally the States can be disappointing for food.
You can eat really really well in most states of the US, but like so much of the US, its a place of two extremes. The "average" is absolutely shocking.
They haven’t had the gastropub Revolution that has happened in the UK and Australia, and which has been crucial
There will be at least one place in any average town with a talented chef who knows what he wants to do, and is having a bash
I saw a documentary on Australian food and they ascribed their food Revolution, almost entirely, to immigration but even more to foodie TV like Masterchef (which was invented in the UK but is wildly popular in its Aussie incarnation).
It makes total sense. Many millions watch Masterchef, pro and amateur. Watching a series is basically like doing a GCSE in cookery. You learn when to baste and how to fillet. You have a go. It’s brilliant. Most people I know, friends and family, can cook well - anyone under 60, that is
One thing that has improved a lot in the US over past 20 years is craft beer....they really gone for that. Its just the same place that will serve you a half decent beer brewed on site or locally, will serve you a meh burger and fries.
Not sure about your tv point. Don't the US have a load of shows just like that, Iron Chef etc, that are equally popular?
Agreed on the beer. American beer selections are now generally better than British. I hear rumours they are improving their cheese as well (it can’t get worse)
But the Masterchef thing is real. Australia has a less atomized culture than the USA, as does Britain
Eg Masterchef gets 5-6m viewers in the UK, thats nearly 10% of the entire country. The us version gets 1m, 0.3%
10% of people tuning in to learn about cooking is enough to change a cooking culture. 0.3% isn’t. And this is repeated over 30 years, beginning in the UK in 1990
American cheese has improved in just the four (almost) five years I've been here. As has their salami.
But it's still not as good as the UK.
France is still le grand fromage.
Corsica and Sardinia have the best cheese in the world. Esp Corsica. Tho Sardinia has the maggot cheese
Corsica is just incredible.You can drive 5km (which takes an hour on their roads) and the next village (which hates the previous village) has an entirely different and vastly superior cheese, and if you demur they all glare at you then turn away like you are a shameful sexual leper
After that they start being rude
Honestly tho the cheese is remarkable. And much of it never leaves the island
However in terms of getting great cheese in your average supermarket I reckon the UK wins, easily. We have all the noble British cheeses plus all the best mainland Europe cheeses, you just don’t get that selection in the EU (they all concentrate on their own cheeses)
The USA might be slowly catching up because they are now winning cheese awards, the same process as happened with their craft beer
However i reckon they are still 20 years behind the curve, so a long way to go, plus they have a culture more resistant to weird foods than better beers
I wonder if they had other reasons, not cheese related, for doing this?
Are there, truly, non-cheese-related reasons for doing things?
Happy memory: on my first venture into pb.com back in May 2005 the board was talking about cheese.
There’s always something to be said for a cheese board.
Devastating to see how much most Russians support their government - some people I formerly considered mates who I stayed with, and drank with, pre-Rona when watching Russian rugby and were perfectly normal humans back then are now frothing at the bit to eliminate the Ukrainian people. Hopefully Johnson's message gets through, for as it stands the Russian people are as culpable as the German people in the 40s.
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
No comprehensive should be "bog standard". They should all be excellent.
I shouldn't have mentioned that my children went to an RC school (they, nor me are Catholic by the way). I fell into your faith school trap. Damn and blast!
What a ludicrous statement. You may as well say 'no supermarkets should be bog standard. They should all be excellent.'
The only way you get to excellence is consumer choice. Applies to education as much as business. Otherwise if there was no choice of supermarket, every supermarket would look like an Asda or Morrisons on a bad day
I don't know how they got into an RC school without being Catholic. Most faith schools require at least a minimum level of church attendance to get in '
None taken!
Supermarkets are not funded out of the public purse for the future benefit of the nation. If they are poor they wither and die. With publicly funded schools it doesn't quite work like that.
And I didn't furtively pretend to be the Pope to get them in. The school knew I was a godless heathen.
If state schools are inadequate they get rebranded as academies, if private schools are inadequate they go out of business.
Either way, they do not go on as before.
Sounds an unusual faith school anyway. The C of E faith school in Loughton for example awards points based on weekly church attendance. The more you attend, the more points you get regardless of how close you live to the school in the district. That is normally standard for most faith schools, C of E or RC. It gets 81% A* to C GCSE grades or the new points equivalent.
Your first paragraph reminds me of Lennie Henry's suggestion that "Windscale has been renamed as Sellarfield, so nuclear fallout would now be known as magic moonbeams".
That was Not The Nine O’Clock News - Mel Smith, Pam S, et al. not Lenny Henry
From ChemEurope.com
"Not the Nine O'Clock News also had a sketch, with a nod to a popular Ready Brek advert, about glowing children and Sellafield".
And
"Comedian Lenny Henry, impersonating newscaster Trevor McDonald, once reported that "Windscale is to be renamed Sellafield, because it sounds nicer. In future, radiation will be referred to as magic moonbeams".
Yes, the internet’s memory is different to mine. If so, my bad
(The weird thing is I can DISTINCTLY recall SEEING Pamela Stephenson make this joke, in my mind, how odd are the tricks of recall)
Memory is strange. Hence Mandela Effect. Strangely I had that when FW de Klerk died. Which I hope both would have found bleakly amusing. On which. How come I missed Tiger Woods nearly dying in a car crash? I have no memory whatsoever of that happening. And I read this board every day.
Exactly the same! Car crash?? Nearly fatal? What????
Was it during Covid? I think we all lost years of memory during Covid. Because we wanted to
Apparently it was 23 Feb 2021. I only know because apparently he is thinking of miraculously playing at the Masters this weekend. I have no memory of this whatsoever. Not an, oh yeah, forgot about that. But none. At all. I'm sure I was following the news. Glad it isn't just me. What else have we edited out?
We are all experiencing this. The brain is editing out this horrific collective memory, because it is so sad and repellent, but in doing this we are also erasing coincidental events, non-plague-related
I believe @SeanT once of this parish, anticipated this phenomenon.
A very prescient article, in retrospect, from May 2020. His extraordinary wisdom is much missed, or, indeed, just forgotten. What was his other name?
John Green offered some thoughts on this in his YA novel, The Fault in Our Stars. Death in War, however senseless is for something to someone. The untold billions dues to disease and illness are seen as pointless deaths. Of course the book itself is about how no death is meaningful but it is life it's self that gives purpose.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
Even in the 90s Ampleforth had something of reputation in a way that St Peter's or The Mount didn't.
I love the nuanced insiderdom of that post. I have no idea where or what those places are.
People I know who were at Ampleforth in the 70s did a lorra psychedelics there.
All greater York private school with boarding elements. I attended none of them.
Signed,
A Pleb.
The Mount is a Quaker operation. St Peter's, erm, claims to be "The fourth oldest school in the world, founded by St Paulinus of York in AD 627." At that sort of timing it sounds more of a question of whether St P's is a Monophysite or Nestorian establishment than a C of E or RC one ...
St Peter's bigger claim to fame is it's links to Guy Fawkes.
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
Faith schools, my arse. Shut them down. I want children to be taught, not indoctrinated in superstitious mumbo-jumbo.
Tough, you are not in power. We Conservatives are. Even Blair recognised how good most faith schools were, so sent his children to them
Yes, I'm with Sandy and everyone else here. One, on principle. If you want to teach your children that there is a God and all the other tenets of your faith, go ahead, I suppose, but I don't see why I should get to pay for it. Two, in practice. There are faith (primary) schools in Sale, and they are consistently the worst performing - presumably because they are taking up teaching time with teaching religion.
I also find it faintly weird and not a little discomfiting that my kids' nominally secular primary schools still have hymns and prayers in assembly. Surely in the secular sector pretty much no-one believes in any of it: it's just a massive exercise in pointlessly going through the motions. I suppose that's some sort of training for life.
I remember when I was at primary school 30-40 years ago it was a charade back then too. A supply teacher joined us for a bit who was clearly a true believer, and seemed genuinely shocked by the inability of a hall full of junior school children to fully partake in care about the state mandated act of worship. She gave us all a good bollocking, of the extent to rouse the normally indiffernt headteacher from her study to see what was going on. The headteacher was as nonplussed as the rest of us with the supply teacher's explanation of 'they're begrudging God ten minutes of their day'. I'm sure the line 'for pity's sake, woman, can't you see we're just going through the motions here' was earnestly fought back in favour of whatever non-commital platitude actually came out.
I'm not seeking to pick a fight with the genuinely religious. But forcing religion on kids seems wrong. And teachers who don't believe forcing religion on kids who don't believe seems stupid and pointless.
'Everyone else on here' ie you and him.
However that is of course standard practice of the left, close down anything successful. As we saw earlier in the anti private school sentiment, now the sentiment to shit down successful faith schools and of course mainly Labour councils closing of grammar schools.
Taken to its logical extreme if Corbyn had got in power for an extended period of time they would of course here nationalised any successful private company they could too. Including most of the FTSE 100.
One size fits all bog standard education and mass nationalised industry and services. That remains the leftist utopia even if it had to compromise to win elections and get into power.
I also pay taxes for your childrens education. If parents of faith wish to send their children to faith schools they are as entitled to do so as parents of no faith are entitled to send their children to non faith schools.
I’m pretty sure Cookie is not a leftie! He and I align on the authoritarian-libertarian axis not on the left-right axis…
Anyway, there’s a brilliant typo in your second para!
Thanks Anabobz - yes, without wanting to pigeon hole myself, I don't think I could be decribed as a lefty. Kinabalu recently declared he had never detected any left-wing impulse at all from me. I do find myself agreeing with you more often than not, however, and on more things which really matter to me. These things are complex...
I thought PB registration required assignment into Left and Right camps, for tracking purposes.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
Even in the 90s Ampleforth had something of reputation in a way that St Peter's or The Mount didn't.
I love the nuanced insiderdom of that post. I have no idea where or what those places are.
People I know who were at Ampleforth in the 70s did a lorra psychedelics there.
All greater York private school with boarding elements. I attended none of them.
Signed,
A Pleb.
The Mount is a Quaker operation. St Peter's, erm, claims to be "The fourth oldest school in the world, founded by St Paulinus of York in AD 627." At that sort of timing it sounds more of a question of whether St P's is a Monophysite or Nestorian establishment than a C of E or RC one ...
St Peter's bigger claim to fame is it's links to Guy Fawkes.
Much of the better restaurant food in the US comes from immigrant families -- and tends to die out, as the families become Americanized. So, for example, a family comes to the United States, sets up a restaurant, because they know how to cook the specialties of their homeland, puts the kids to work, maybe even paying them eventually, and prospers for a while. But, when the grandkids come of age, they usually are uninterested in the grueling work of running a restaurant -- and have many more opportunities open to them. And so the restaurant, still profitable, closes.
(In the DC area, that sometimes inspired a bitter joke, after a government friendly to the United States fell: "Lose a country, gain a restaurant.")
In the Seattle area that has meant, for example, a decline in the number of good Japanese restaurants over recent decades, and an increase in Mexican restaurants. (I much prefer the former.)
Similarly, I would expect that New York City has fewer Jewish delis than it once did.
> when I was a boy in WVa, once a year local Mason Lodge would hand out small New Testaments (revised King James) to students in public school classes. This was VERY common back then; my father also got a free NT when HE was a school kid in Pa thirty years before.
Beside that, no religion in my public schools, except for silent prayer before exams. Lot of talk then about prayer in school, but little organized except occasionally by some student or teacher who was regarded as a religious nut. Interesting, fact that town of less than 5k had 20+ churches was a LIMITING factor, since by definition Protestant denominations & congregations were deeply split over . . . . wait for it . . . religion.
> at Louisiana State University one of the notable campus celebrities was "Holy Hubert" who regularly smote the entire student body chapter and verse for our manifold sins and wickedness, speaking from a soap box or some such on the Parade Ground. Often he'd bee joined by a female evangelist, Sister Sadie I think. Frat boys enjoyed heckling and hooting and think HH and SS enjoyed that too, despite their seeming condemnation.
Once I was returning to LSU from a trip back home, via bus, and climbed into a Greyhound for last leg from New Orleans to Baton Rouge. When I old guy sat down next too me, and started talking up a storm.
I soon realized - to my horror - that my companion for next hour & half was none other than Holy Humbert. Who shortly informed me that he was not merely the Messenger of the Lord, but that he WAS the Lord.
Personally, I think Comte is the very best hard cheese, but I would point out too that Cheddar is internationally ubiquitous, and the very best Cheddar comes from England, too.
"Gardenwalker? All I can say is, he's a hard man who likes his cheese hard."
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
That's fine. As I say, Sky Productions is also investing £1.5bn and of course the BBC has a massive budget too.
My point was your claims that Film4 is the backbone of UK tv and film is just nonsense now. The game has completely changed. Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Sky, BBC, all spend mega bucks on production.
Film4 might have been 10 years ago, but its the equivalent of saying that Cornish bloke on Bodmin Moor who works with car engines to make knives is the backbone of high end car engineering in the UK, rather than say Rolls Royce or Bentley.
Of course its good there are such people, but the training and apprentice schemes via Rolls and Bentley is far more people to careers in that industry.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
That's fine. As I say, Sky Productions is also investing huge sums and of course the BBC has a massive budget too.
My point was your claims that Film4 is the backbone of UK tv and film is just nonsense now. Its like saying that Cornish bloke on Bodmin Moor who works with car engines to make knives is the backbone of high end car engineering in the UK, rather than say Rolls Royce or Bentley.
It depends on whether you think you’ve proven that talent is effectively nurtured by the big corporates.
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
No comprehensive should be "bog standard". They should all be excellent.
I shouldn't have mentioned that my children went to an RC school (they, nor me are Catholic by the way). I fell into your faith school trap. Damn and blast!
What a ludicrous statement. You may as well say 'no supermarkets should be bog standard. They should all be excellent.'
The only way you get to excellence is consumer choice. Applies to education as much as business. Otherwise if there was no choice of supermarket, every supermarket would look like an Asda or Morrisons on a bad day
I don't know how they got into an RC school without being Catholic. Most faith schools require at least a minimum level of church attendance to get in '
Nope my children went to a C of E school and we are atheists.
Also this consumer choice stuff you talk of; earlier you wanted state controlled energy pricing for oil companies. Make up your mind, do you want competition or state control.
You can just about get into a C of E primary school or an average faith school if you only live in the parish.
The top faith secondary schools however almost all require a high level of church attendance to get into them as they are very oversubscribed.
I was not proposing to nationalise all energy companies was I, which Corbyn would have done. Just requiring them to pass on lower energy prices to UK consumers as energy supply was expanded in the UK
I never said you were. I said you said state control of prices, which is what you are proposing. That is price fixing below the market price. How on earth you think that will work. I have no idea when there will be in parallel market priced fuel. Is the govt going to subsidize all imports? I assume not so the same fuel will have 2 different prices. How does that work? Maybe like Cuba where you get vouchers for some stuff and other stuff is at market rates. I could go on. Trade negotiations and deals for instance would be buggered. Fortunately we have Brexited because that would have been illegal. What about the oil companies. Why would they bother in the UK if the price is below the market price.
You say these things but have no idea.
No it wasn't, I said expand energy production including fracking and shale to increase supply thus reducing prices. Then force energy companies to pass those price cuts on.
That will have to happen not just here but across the world if governments are not to be thrown out of office over sky high energy prices by angry voters
You are just making stuff up now. You specifically said increasing production in the UK to reduce prices. When it was pointed out that it is a global commodity so you wouldn't get lower prices in the UK you said you would force the UK companies to sell their oil at a lower price than the global price. That can't be done for the reasons already stated.
True it would work if global production increased but that is not what you said originally. You specifically said to achieve this you just referred to just UK activity and specific UK price fixing.
Yes, increasing production here and globally will reduce energy prices. Indeed a government which expands fracking and shale production in the UK would expect energy prices to come down as a result and could tax the profits of the companies which do not pass on lower prices. Starmer has already made clear a Labour government will indeed impose a windfall tax on any excess profits being made by oil and gas companies in the UK when energy prices are rising
You still don't get commodity pricing do you:
a) The oil companies do not set the price, the market does. It is not a case of not passing it on. It sells at the market price, so this nonsense of taxing companies extra who don't pass it on is just that, nonsense as it is not within their control.
b) Increasing fracking in the UK has practically no impact on global prices so prices won't come down. Of course it will if global production increased BUT you didn't say that. You were specifically talking about the UK only initially. You said 'we', you referred to UK fracking, you referred to UK coal mines, you referred to Starmer. This is all UK.
c) You then referred to the UK companies having to pass on a price reduction, whatever that means. As pointed out by myself and others that is impossible in a global market place. It is only possible in authoritarian states typically communist where pricing can be state controlled internally ignoring the true market.
a) Well that is EXACTLY what a Starmer government has said it will do if elected ie impose a windfall tax on the profits of all oil and gas companies in the UK which do not cut energy prices. So tough, if you get a Labour government that is what it will do.
b) Increased fracking in the UK obviously increases supply in the UK and that will in turn have some impact on cutting prices in the UK. Though yes we need more fracking and shale extraction globally for a major difference.
A windfall tax is not the same as fixing the price of oil. It is completely different. It is a tax on profits.
You still don't get commodity pricing. Can you not get it into your head that oil production companies don't set oil prices, it is the market that does. That is why they are currently getting a windfall. Increased production in the UK helps our economy but has no impact on pricing at all as the price is set globally by the global marketplace and this extra input into it is trivial. The UK companies sell in this market. If you make them sell at a lower price they will simply stop UK operations.
I'm stopping now as you are clearly as ignorant of economics as most other subjects you pontificate upon.
I’m eating the Toblerone from my minibar, because the food in Izmir is so bad
Why stay there? Only an hour down the road to Selcuk to see Ephesus. Perfectly good restaurants there.
Or push on to Kusadasi for some wonderful seafront fish restaurants.
But the sea is right here. I can view it from my hotel
I do wonder if the terrible inflation crisis is making yer generally mediocre Turkish food much worse than normal
Turkish food is never great, It has always been overrated by its fans (like Lebanese). I’ve been here too many times and been sorely disappointed.
But this is a new level of dire
I liked Ephesus, but was more impressed at looking down on the River Menderes (Maiandros in Greek) and twigging the origin of the English verb.
Any recommendations of how to do Ephesus? 3 hours enough? Avoid local bars? Take a flask of arak?
These days my culture ceiling runs at about 60-90 minutes, and I was in Ephesus a long while ago. So perhaps not the person to ask.
I think the Library is the main thing, and the museum and amphitheatre. Then the rest is just wandering around to breath in the scale of things. You will probably have seen way better ruins. But it is nice to sit down with a Turkish tea or coffee and take in the surroundings.
Temple of Diana?
You bin there? There's exactly one column left standing
This is a definite theme now. Turkish food is terrible. Way worse than, say, Germany or Holland (the worst in western Europe)
It’s down there with a middle income African country or somewhere like Oman
It is shite. In Erdogan’s gleaming Istanbul airport at their flashy Italian restaurant I ordered the Caprese salad. It came as cold sliced tomato with weird tasteless frigid bits of cheese, and chopped lettuce. That was it. No dressing, no nothing, No oil, no pepper, no salt. Zero. No pesto or basil. Disgusting
Not only was it dreadfully bad, the staff had no idea WHY it was bad, when I politely queried
It was like eating in an eerie, hallucinated version of 70s Britain, yet in a huge sparkly airport
In Sanliurfa the Head of Regional Culture and Tourism took me to a celebrated restaurant for their famous liver kebab. It was nice bits of liver, in a kebab, with an OK sauce. That was it. You could eat it in Camden at 3am after a big night and think Hmm, decent fast food. And they were trying to show off???
UGHHHHHHH
I haven't eaten in Turkey, but I was surprised at how bad the food was in Copenhagen (2018). What's the story with putting massive dollops of butter onto everything?
Posh Danish food is now world class. But everything beneath is still catching up (in Denmark)
Germany, Holland and the rest of Scandi are notably behind.
Britain is no longer the laggard, you can now eat better in the UK than most European countries (and certainly most countries around the world)
Spain, Italy and France are still superior to the UK. Tho Britain is edging France because of our better world cuisine, and insane French attachment to the Great Tradition
Nonetheless I’d have those three in the European Superleague, and Britain at the top of the next division, ahead of Greece and Portugal
How do you rate the great State of Louisiana?
Magnificent. The only state in the USA where I have eaten brilliant food, day after day
And it’s not just a New Orleans thing. The food in Louisiana outside NOLA is unusually excellent, even down to the breakfasts
Food culture is a weird thing. But Louisiana has it, and delivers it
I found Atlanta, Georgia, bizarrely good.
Absolute awful city in almost every way - except its food scene, which is weirdly great.
Generally the States can be disappointing for food.
You can eat really really well in most states of the US, but like so much of the US, its a place of two extremes. The "average" is absolutely shocking.
They haven’t had the gastropub Revolution that has happened in the UK and Australia, and which has been crucial
There will be at least one place in any average town with a talented chef who knows what he wants to do, and is having a bash
I saw a documentary on Australian food and they ascribed their food Revolution, almost entirely, to immigration but even more to foodie TV like Masterchef (which was invented in the UK but is wildly popular in its Aussie incarnation).
It makes total sense. Many millions watch Masterchef, pro and amateur. Watching a series is basically like doing a GCSE in cookery. You learn when to baste and how to fillet. You have a go. It’s brilliant. Most people I know, friends and family, can cook well - anyone under 60, that is
One thing that has improved a lot in the US over past 20 years is craft beer....they really gone for that. Its just the same place that will serve you a half decent beer brewed on site or locally, will serve you a meh burger and fries.
Not sure about your tv point. Don't the US have a load of shows just like that, Iron Chef etc, that are equally popular?
Agreed on the beer. American beer selections are now generally better than British. I hear rumours they are improving their cheese as well (it can’t get worse)
But the Masterchef thing is real. Australia has a less atomized culture than the USA, as does Britain
Eg Masterchef gets 5-6m viewers in the UK, thats nearly 10% of the entire country. The us version gets 1m, 0.3%
10% of people tuning in to learn about cooking is enough to change a cooking culture. 0.3% isn’t. And this is repeated over 30 years, beginning in the UK in 1990
American cheese has improved in just the four (almost) five years I've been here. As has their salami.
But it's still not as good as the UK.
France is still le grand fromage.
Corsica and Sardinia have the best cheese in the world. Esp Corsica. Tho Sardinia has the maggot cheese
Corsica is just incredible.You can drive 5km (which takes an hour on their roads) and the next village (which hates the previous village) has an entirely different and vastly superior cheese, and if you demur they all glare at you then turn away like you are a shameful sexual leper
After that they start being rude
Honestly tho the cheese is remarkable. And much of it never leaves the island
However in terms of getting great cheese in your average supermarket I reckon the UK wins, easily. We have all the noble British cheeses plus all the best mainland Europe cheeses, you just don’t get that selection in the EU (they all concentrate on their own cheeses)
The USA might be slowly catching up because they are now winning cheese awards, the same process as happened with their craft beer
However i reckon they are still 20 years behind the curve, so a long way to go, plus they have a culture more resistant to weird foods than better beers
British cheese is a revelation. When I was a kid you could get several different sorts of Cheddar, plus Stilton at Christmas.
Confession: after trying all the cheeses of the world, sometimes given to me by the world cheese award winning cheese makers themselves, I have come to the conclusion that Colston Basset Stiltion, as served by my local Whole Foods in Camden, really is the best cheese in the world. The King of Cheeses
Unctuous, creamy, rich, intense, memorable, full of umami, just amazing
And i have had Holy Goat served to me by nuns in Victoria, Australia
It’s certainly the best blue cheese in the world. Only rivalled by Stichelton (which is perhaps cheating).
I do find the general Francophobia wearying though. You can go to remote Alpine passes in France and find a cheese shop that serves two dozen or more cheeses.
Good quality is generally excellent in both France and Japan, even if Paris is not what what it was.
The same is certainly not true of Britain. Although I rate British food much higher than the average world citizen, it’s just very hard to get very good food much outside London without some decent planning, with the possible exception of the West Country.
The USA is, food speaking, a fucking nuclear wasteland.
Have you never visited New Orleans? Start of the morning with cafe au lait & beignets at Cafe du Monde (the one down the street from Lafayette Sq) then graze on from there . . .
I’m have, I have. New Orleans and Louisiana are exceptional. I agree with the general sentiments on this thread.
I’m talking about the USA en masse.
You have a point. Though possible to find good eats in every state, esp. IF you're lucky.
Among strange examples, the best Italian sandwich (hoggie/grinder) I've ever enjoyed, was in a small local chain Italian restaurant in Ironton, Ohio. A place barely noted - and certainly NOT for fine dining!
Must be some gems tucked away in odd corners of Gotham, certainly to compete with Appalachia?
If you are in Gotham do drop me a note and we can try to find some!
I’m a bit peeved because I’m on the UWS and it’s not Midtown or Brooklyn which is where most of the good restaurants are these days.
(I used to stay Midtown when I came to NY for work).
Plus I usually have my family with me and the kids wants burger, chicken strips, or something similarly beige.
Have you tried Staten Island? Godfather's pizza . . . made & enjoyed by authentic "godfathers"!
My most notable NYC dining experience was at Max's Kansas City in 1972. Mostly because somebody at nearby table was smoking weed.
Rishi's star falls further as he donates £100, 000 to Winchester School
He has astonished me and Boris needs to move him on
So out of touch
"The donations fund bursaries for children whose parents would not otherwise be able to send them there."
I would have thought as a Conservative leaning voter you would be board with rich people donating so those fortunate can have access to top level education?
From my side of the political divide, a Chancellor properly funding a state system benefitting all children, rather than a private tax dodging bursary for one or two social climbers would be more appropriate.
Let's all laugh at 12 year old working class children, and call them names. Hurrah!
The chances are they won't be "gifted" children from a sink estate in Scunthorpe anyway, but less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
But I see your point, like Basil Fawlty said, "no riff-raff".
No. you are simply wrong. I was at one of these schools, I had friends who were on these bursaries, and they were not less well off middle class wannabe high rollers from the Home Counties.
I went to a provincial grammar school (granted, over 40 years ago) and the council house kids were looked down upon, and that was by both teachers and students. Fortunately for me, I was not from a council estate, so I was fine.
I go back to my original point. A well funded, well managed non-selective state school system for all those who want to achieve, would be my preference. Quite how one arrives at that point is for smarter people than me.
Or a 'comprehensive education, to make up for their comprehensive education' as Sir Humphrey and Jim Hacker promised!
I have told you many times before that prior to Ledbury Grammar School I went to an excellent High School. The rounded quality of the teaching, by enthusiastic, generally young teachers, enthused students into achieving excellent grades and several students in my year finished up with Oxford or Cambridge degrees and very impressive careers ( not me!). For example one became a British High Commissioner and another a keyboard player in the biggest band of the 1980s.
So why did it work? It was the early days of comprehensive education so it was properly funded. The teachers were motivated, and in turn motivated the students. All subjects were streamed by subject. So kids who were good at Maths were in set one for Maths, equally if they were poor at English they would have been in set 7 for English (a logistical nightmare, no doubt).
My children also went to an excellent RC Comprehensive School too. It was well funded and the teachers were motivated.
We want more faith schools too like your RC Comprehensive for your children.
Choice not one size fits all, whether academies, free schools, faith schools, some grammar schools, technical schools etc.
Not only bog standard comprehensives you have no alternative but to send your children to if of only average income or less
No comprehensive should be "bog standard". They should all be excellent.
I shouldn't have mentioned that my children went to an RC school (they, nor me are Catholic by the way). I fell into your faith school trap. Damn and blast!
What a ludicrous statement. You may as well say 'no supermarkets should be bog standard. They should all be excellent.'
The only way you get to excellence is consumer choice. Applies to education as much as business. Otherwise if there was no choice of supermarket, every supermarket would look like an Asda or Morrisons on a bad day
I don't know how they got into an RC school without being Catholic. Most faith schools require at least a minimum level of church attendance to get in '
Nope my children went to a C of E school and we are atheists.
Also this consumer choice stuff you talk of; earlier you wanted state controlled energy pricing for oil companies. Make up your mind, do you want competition or state control.
You can just about get into a C of E primary school or an average faith school if you only live in the parish.
The top faith secondary schools however almost all require a high level of church attendance to get into them as they are very oversubscribed.
I was not proposing to nationalise all energy companies was I, which Corbyn would have done. Just requiring them to pass on lower energy prices to UK consumers as energy supply was expanded in the UK
I never said you were. I said you said state control of prices, which is what you are proposing. That is price fixing below the market price. How on earth you think that will work. I have no idea when there will be in parallel market priced fuel. Is the govt going to subsidize all imports? I assume not so the same fuel will have 2 different prices. How does that work? Maybe like Cuba where you get vouchers for some stuff and other stuff is at market rates. I could go on. Trade negotiations and deals for instance would be buggered. Fortunately we have Brexited because that would have been illegal. What about the oil companies. Why would they bother in the UK if the price is below the market price.
You say these things but have no idea.
No it wasn't, I said expand energy production including fracking and shale to increase supply thus reducing prices. Then force energy companies to pass those price cuts on.
That will have to happen not just here but across the world if governments are not to be thrown out of office over sky high energy prices by angry voters
You are just making stuff up now. You specifically said increasing production in the UK to reduce prices. When it was pointed out that it is a global commodity so you wouldn't get lower prices in the UK you said you would force the UK companies to sell their oil at a lower price than the global price. That can't be done for the reasons already stated.
True it would work if global production increased but that is not what you said originally. You specifically said to achieve this you just referred to just UK activity and specific UK price fixing.
Yes, increasing production here and globally will reduce energy prices. Indeed a government which expands fracking and shale production in the UK would expect energy prices to come down as a result and could tax the profits of the companies which do not pass on lower prices. Starmer has already made clear a Labour government will indeed impose a windfall tax on any excess profits being made by oil and gas companies in the UK when energy prices are rising
You still don't get commodity pricing do you:
a) The oil companies do not set the price, the market does. It is not a case of not passing it on. It sells at the market price, so this nonsense of taxing companies extra who don't pass it on is just that, nonsense as it is not within their control.
b) Increasing fracking in the UK has practically no impact on global prices so prices won't come down. Of course it will if global production increased BUT you didn't say that. You were specifically talking about the UK only initially. You said 'we', you referred to UK fracking, you referred to UK coal mines, you referred to Starmer. This is all UK.
c) You then referred to the UK companies having to pass on a price reduction, whatever that means. As pointed out by myself and others that is impossible in a global market place. It is only possible in authoritarian states typically communist where pricing can be state controlled internally ignoring the true market.
a) Well that is EXACTLY what a Starmer government has said it will do if elected ie impose a windfall tax on the profits of all oil and gas companies in the UK which do not cut energy prices. So tough, if you get a Labour government that is what it will do.
b) Increased fracking in the UK obviously increases supply in the UK and that will in turn have some impact on cutting prices in the UK. Though yes we need more fracking and shale extraction globally for a major difference.
c) you normally have to pay for a licence to extract stuff. So why can't the contract be an agreement to supply x amount to consumers for y time at a price no more than z? The price is high at the moment so it should still be economic to extract at less than the market rate.
I’m eating the Toblerone from my minibar, because the food in Izmir is so bad
Why stay there? Only an hour down the road to Selcuk to see Ephesus. Perfectly good restaurants there.
Or push on to Kusadasi for some wonderful seafront fish restaurants.
But the sea is right here. I can view it from my hotel
I do wonder if the terrible inflation crisis is making yer generally mediocre Turkish food much worse than normal
Turkish food is never great, It has always been overrated by its fans (like Lebanese). I’ve been here too many times and been sorely disappointed.
But this is a new level of dire
I liked Ephesus, but was more impressed at looking down on the River Menderes (Maiandros in Greek) and twigging the origin of the English verb.
Any recommendations of how to do Ephesus? 3 hours enough? Avoid local bars? Take a flask of arak?
These days my culture ceiling runs at about 60-90 minutes, and I was in Ephesus a long while ago. So perhaps not the person to ask.
I think the Library is the main thing, and the museum and amphitheatre. Then the rest is just wandering around to breath in the scale of things. You will probably have seen way better ruins. But it is nice to sit down with a Turkish tea or coffee and take in the surroundings.
Temple of Diana?
You bin there? There's exactly one column left standing
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
That's fine. As I say, Sky Productions is also investing huge sums and of course the BBC has a massive budget too.
My point was your claims that Film4 is the backbone of UK tv and film is just nonsense now. Its like saying that Cornish bloke on Bodmin Moor who works with car engines to make knives is the backbone of high end car engineering in the UK, rather than say Rolls Royce or Bentley.
It depends on whether you think you’ve proven that talent is effectively nurtured by the big corporates.
I’m not sure you have.
Again, quantity is not quality.
And again, the quality of the blue chip shows are extremely high end, often better than movie quality these days. There are also lots of people who would never even be working in the industry if it wasn't for the likes of Netflix e.g Double Negative have a very large presence in the UK, they produce the best in the business VFX. Until the likes of Netflix came along, the only people spending the money to use their services where the absolutely huge blockbusters, now the likes of Netflix use them e.g. Stranger Things, the award winning and incredibly popular show on Netflix.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
That's fine. As I say, Sky Productions is also investing huge sums and of course the BBC has a massive budget too.
My point was your claims that Film4 is the backbone of UK tv and film is just nonsense now. Its like saying that Cornish bloke on Bodmin Moor who works with car engines to make knives is the backbone of high end car engineering in the UK, rather than say Rolls Royce or Bentley.
It depends on whether you think you’ve proven that talent is effectively nurtured by the big corporates.
I’m not sure you have.
Again, quantity is not quality.
And again, the quality of the blue chip shows are extremely high end, often better than movie quality these days.
Ok but I was talking about film.
Look, I’m not arguing to have Netflix banned.
I am arguing to preserve a production/funding capability that will be closed down once asset strippers are let in.
As for the rest of Channel 4, it was interesting to read @WhisperingOracle’s account of the 1990 reforms. I chiefly know 4 as the home of Big Brother which as far as I’m concerned pioneered “Cruel TV”. Hardly a public service.
Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom have vowed to expand cooperation on hypersonic weapons under the AUKUS pact as the three countries press on with the trilateral plan to develop nuclear-powered submarines for the Royal Australian Navy.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
That's fine. As I say, Sky Productions is also investing huge sums and of course the BBC has a massive budget too.
My point was your claims that Film4 is the backbone of UK tv and film is just nonsense now. Its like saying that Cornish bloke on Bodmin Moor who works with car engines to make knives is the backbone of high end car engineering in the UK, rather than say Rolls Royce or Bentley.
It depends on whether you think you’ve proven that talent is effectively nurtured by the big corporates.
I’m not sure you have.
Again, quantity is not quality.
And again, the quality of the blue chip shows are extremely high end, often better than movie quality these days.
Ok but I was talking about film.
Look, I’m not arguing to have Netflix banned.
I am arguing to preserve a production/funding capability that will be closed down once asset strippers are let in.
As for the rest of Channel 4, it was interesting to read @WhisperingOracle’s account of the 1990 reforms. I chiefly know 4 as the home of Big Brother which as far as I’m concerned pioneered “Cruel TV”. Hardly a public service.
The dividing line between film and tv is rapidly going away. I am not arguing that Film4 hasn't given opportunity to make some interesting films, but it is a tiny player in this enormous market, which all the big companies are investing massively in the UK.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
It's incredible how the three main policies (outside flu/war) of one of the largest Conservative majorities ever are privatising a second tier tv channel, marginal tax deductible benefits from investment and raising almost all taxes. They're so completely out of ideology that they don't even know what they want to do with unparalleled power. Thatcher, and other great Con leaders would see this as a chance to re-shape the country. Where's the home building programmes, massive green power, or funding drivers of productivity?
Much of the better restaurant food in the US comes from immigrant families -- and tends to die out, as the families become Americanized. So, for example, a family comes to the United States, sets up a restaurant, because they know how to cook the specialties of their homeland, puts the kids to work, maybe even paying them eventually, and prospers for a while. But, when the grandkids come of age, they usually are uninterested in the grueling work of running a restaurant -- and have many more opportunities open to them. And so the restaurant, still profitable, closes.
(In the DC area, that sometimes inspired a bitter joke, after a government friendly to the United States fell: "Lose a country, gain a restaurant.")
In the Seattle area that has meant, for example, a decline in the number of good Japanese restaurants over recent decades, and an increase in Mexican restaurants. (I much prefer the former.)
Similarly, I would expect that New York City has fewer Jewish delis than it once did.
Yes. Re: DC, was visiting a friend there one Memorial Day and he took me to Adams-Morgan section (aka Madams Organ) which was hip back then. After looking found a small Salvadoran restaurant below street level, that was filled with Salvadorans who had the day off but no picnic to go to. It was outstanding.
My family went years ago to a small Vietnamese place in Ashland, Kentucky. Which is NOT notably cosmopolitan (except for Miley Cyrus's daddy). They had a nice meal, and at the end asked the very nice young Vietnamese waitress for a "doggy bag".
When she returned to their table, she was carrying rather full shopping bag. When my folks asked, what? the young woman replied, oh, since you're taking what you didn't eat home for your pet, thought the dog might also like what other diners left.
When she was told real meaning of phrase "doggy bag" they all had a good laugh!
It's incredible how the three main policies (outside flu/war) of the largest Conservative majority are privatising a second tier tv channel, marginal tax deductible benefits from investment and raising almost all taxes. They're so completely out of ideology that they don't even know what they want to do with unparalleled power. Thatcher, and other great Con leaders would see this as a chance to re-shape the country. Where's the home building programmes, massive green power, or funding drivers of productivity?
I mean, totes.
Please don’t get me started.
Not least because the UK is asleep and nobody is on here late at night to hear my ravings.
It's incredible how the three main policies (outside flu/war) of the largest Conservative majority are privatising a second tier tv channel, marginal tax deductible benefits from investment and raising almost all taxes. They're so completely out of ideology that they don't even know what they want to do with unparalleled power. Thatcher, and other great Con leaders would see this as a chance to re-shape the country. Where's the home building programmes, massive green power, or funding drivers of productivity?
I mean, totes.
Please don’t get me started.
Not least because the UK is asleep and nobody is on here late at night to hear my ravings.
Thatcher would be fucking fumin’.
Haha, it's just pathetic. From day 90 they lost all drive and all policy was focused on survival. While I don't like BJ, I don't think he's acquitted himself that terribly from war and covid, but the government shows a total inability to focus on more than one thing at once, which is where ministers like Gove make a difference. At least he has ideas and drive, whereas most of the current lot are yes-men who seek to do nothing. Wasting a majority like this is a crime. The Cons need a long period outside of power to work out what they stand for.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
As has been shown in the various soft power rankings. Keeping the UK on top of the soft power rankings needs to be the number one priority for all Governments, and all sensible politicians can see it.
It's incredible how the three main policies (outside flu/war) of the largest Conservative majority are privatising a second tier tv channel, marginal tax deductible benefits from investment and raising almost all taxes. They're so completely out of ideology that they don't even know what they want to do with unparalleled power. Thatcher, and other great Con leaders would see this as a chance to re-shape the country. Where's the home building programmes, massive green power, or funding drivers of productivity?
I mean, totes.
Please don’t get me started.
Not least because the UK is asleep and nobody is on here late at night to hear my ravings.
Thatcher would be fucking fumin’.
Haha, it's just pathetic. From day 90 they lost all drive and all policy was focused on survival. While I don't like BJ, I don't think he's acquitted himself that terribly from war and covid, but the government shows a total inability to focus on more than one thing at once, which is where ministers like Gove make a difference. At least he has ideas and drive, whereas most of the current lot are yes-men who seek to do nothing. Wasting a majority like this is a crime. The Cons need a long period outside of power to work out what they stand for.
To the extent there is an ideology beyond an essentially corrupt “Operation Save Big Dog”, it’s contained in “Britannia Unchained”.
Across the political spectrum there seems to be a real dearth of new workable ideas, and has been for years.
I think Corbyn project actually identified a lot of real problems (and I think Big Dom also was good at that). The problem is Corbyn solution was always to open the Labour manifesto of the 1970s and copy / paste it, and Big Dom was well what we need to do is burn it all down, hire a couple of tech bros on £500k a year and they will use Machine Learning and AI to fix it.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
I am heartened to find a general, latent Anglophilia in New York at least. It’s surprised me.
Across the political spectrum there seems to be a real dearth of new workable ideas, and has been for years.
I think Corbyn project actually identified a lot of real problems (and I think Big Dom also was good at that). The problem is Corbyn solution was always to open the Labour manifesto of the 1970s and copy / paste it, and Big Dom was well what we need to do is burn it all down, hire a couple of tech bros on £500k a year and they will use Machine Learning and AI to fix it.
We’ve lost a decade and a half. First to fatigued Blairism/Brownism, then to austerity, then to Brexit and now to a generally dishonest populism.
It's incredible how the three main policies (outside flu/war) of the largest Conservative majority are privatising a second tier tv channel, marginal tax deductible benefits from investment and raising almost all taxes. They're so completely out of ideology that they don't even know what they want to do with unparalleled power. Thatcher, and other great Con leaders would see this as a chance to re-shape the country. Where's the home building programmes, massive green power, or funding drivers of productivity?
I mean, totes.
Please don’t get me started.
Not least because the UK is asleep and nobody is on here late at night to hear my ravings.
Thatcher would be fucking fumin’.
Haha, it's just pathetic. From day 90 they lost all drive and all policy was focused on survival. While I don't like BJ, I don't think he's acquitted himself that terribly from war and covid, but the government shows a total inability to focus on more than one thing at once, which is where ministers like Gove make a difference. At least he has ideas and drive, whereas most of the current lot are yes-men who seek to do nothing. Wasting a majority like this is a crime. The Cons need a long period outside of power to work out what they stand for.
To the extent there is an ideology beyond an essentially corrupt “Operation Save Big Dog”, it’s contained in “Britannia Unchained”.
The problem is, it appears to be total dogshit.
I've only read bits of that book but I'm not sure it coincides very much with Boris Johnson's own political philosophy. Maybe his problem is the absence of heavyweight allies, and some of those who could potentially have played that role were exiled or alienated during the Brexit civil wars.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
I am heartened to find a general, latent Anglophilia in New York at least. It’s surprised me.
We think Brits classier (in a good way), smarter, sexier (in some way) and more (weirdly or not) more authentic.
We really are a bunch of dumb-asses, aren't we?
EDIT - Also an Anglophobic layer there. Less on East and Left Coasts, bit more in the Heatland.
One way expressed is use of mock-English accents generally implying some level of snobbishness or superciliousity.
It's incredible how the three main policies (outside flu/war) of the largest Conservative majority are privatising a second tier tv channel, marginal tax deductible benefits from investment and raising almost all taxes. They're so completely out of ideology that they don't even know what they want to do with unparalleled power. Thatcher, and other great Con leaders would see this as a chance to re-shape the country. Where's the home building programmes, massive green power, or funding drivers of productivity?
I mean, totes.
Please don’t get me started.
Not least because the UK is asleep and nobody is on here late at night to hear my ravings.
Thatcher would be fucking fumin’.
Haha, it's just pathetic. From day 90 they lost all drive and all policy was focused on survival. While I don't like BJ, I don't think he's acquitted himself that terribly from war and covid, but the government shows a total inability to focus on more than one thing at once, which is where ministers like Gove make a difference. At least he has ideas and drive, whereas most of the current lot are yes-men who seek to do nothing. Wasting a majority like this is a crime. The Cons need a long period outside of power to work out what they stand for.
To the extent there is an ideology beyond an essentially corrupt “Operation Save Big Dog”, it’s contained in “Britannia Unchained”.
The problem is, it appears to be total dogshit.
I've only read bits of that book but I'm not sure it coincides very much with Boris Johnson's own political philosophy. Maybe his problem is the absence of heavyweight allies, and some of those who could potentially have played that role were exiled or alienated during the Brexit civil wars.
Boris is bikes, brexity populism, and levelling up. The latter is critical, but has been cut off at its knees by Rishi.
Rishi, Raab, Truss, Kwasi, and Javid are all Britannia Unchained nutters.
Across the political spectrum there seems to be a real dearth of new workable ideas, and has been for years.
I think Corbyn project actually identified a lot of real problems (and I think Big Dom also was good at that). The problem is Corbyn solution was always to open the Labour manifesto of the 1970s and copy / paste it, and Big Dom was well what we need to do is burn it all down, hire a couple of tech bros on £500k a year and they will use Machine Learning and AI to fix it.
We’ve lost a decade and a half. First to fatigued Blairism/Brownism, then to austerity, then to Brexit and now to a generally dishonest populism.
Blair, especially 2nd term onwards, was a huge failure of opportunity. Had political cover to do basically anything he wanted with an economy in a position to enable this. Since 2010, its been basically been fire fighting from effects of 2008 financial crash, then Brexit, then COVID and WW 2.5.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
I am heartened to find a general, latent Anglophilia in New York at least. It’s surprised me.
We think Brits classier (in a good way), smarter, sexier (in some way) and more (weirdly or not) more authentic.
We really are a bunch of dumb-asses, aren't we?
I’m a great admirer of the American project. So, no, not dumb-ass, even as I whinge and moan about the food and the guns etc in my passive aggressive Anglo-Kiwi, protestant way.
Across the political spectrum there seems to be a real dearth of new workable ideas, and has been for years.
I think Corbyn project actually identified a lot of real problems (and I think Big Dom also was good at that). The problem is Corbyn solution was always to open the Labour manifesto of the 1970s and copy / paste it, and Big Dom was well what we need to do is burn it all down, hire a couple of tech bros on £500k a year and they will use Machine Learning and AI to fix it.
Part of the reason why old tankie gathered so much support among the young was because he identified the problems, even if he solutions were ineffectual rehashed shit. In the next 5 years or so the demographics who have become strongly pro-Lab will leave the cities in numbers that will affect almost all areas around major population centres. A sensible Con leader would pivot to catering for them.
Already the effects can be seen. In 2019 Henley was used in multiple articles as an example of somewhere that wouldn't vote Con only in apocalyptic circumstances - Now the Town Council: 13 Ind, 3 Con (from 8-8 in the depths of May's 2017), District council: 13 LD, 10 Con, 6 Grn, 3 Lab, 4 Other (from 33 Con, 3 Other in 2015), CountyC: 21 LD, 21 Con, 16 Lab, 5 Oth from 51 Con, 22 Oth in the early teens. The shires will not come back to the Cons while they continue on this dithering path.
1. Planning reform 2. The imbalance of wealth vs income tax 3. Underinvestment in R&D and infra 4. Repair of economic relationships with EU 5. The impoverishment of younger people 6. The imbalance between north and south
The opportunity still remains for the UK to be a lowish-tax, highish-solidarity entrepôt and magnet for the world’s most talented people.
It could even aim to outpace Germany as the largest nation by GDP in Europe.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
I am heartened to find a general, latent Anglophilia in New York at least. It’s surprised me.
We think Brits classier (in a good way), smarter, sexier (in some way) and more (weirdly or not) more authentic.
We really are a bunch of dumb-asses, aren't we?
I’m a great admirer of the American project. So, no, not dumb-ass, even as I whinge and moan about the food and the guns etc in my passive aggressive Anglo-Kiwi, protestant way.
Being from NZ, you've got it made in US. Like being Brit but without baggage. Plus Lord of the Rings!
As long as you don't beat up on the Maori . . . and point out they're the guys who did in the dodo . . .
Across the political spectrum there seems to be a real dearth of new workable ideas, and has been for years.
I think Corbyn project actually identified a lot of real problems (and I think Big Dom also was good at that). The problem is Corbyn solution was always to open the Labour manifesto of the 1970s and copy / paste it, and Big Dom was well what we need to do is burn it all down, hire a couple of tech bros on £500k a year and they will use Machine Learning and AI to fix it.
Part of the reason why old tankie gathered so much support among the young was because he identified the problems, even if he solutions were ineffectual rehashed shit. In the next 5 years or so the demographics who have become strongly pro-Lab will leave the cities in numbers that will affect almost all areas around major population centres. A sensible Con leader would pivot to catering for them.
Already the effects can be seen. In 2019 Henley was used in multiple articles as an example of somewhere that wouldn't vote Con only in apocalyptic circumstances - Now the Town Council: 13 Ind, 3 Con (from 8-8 in the depths of May's 2017), District council: 13 LD, 10 Con, 6 Grn, 3 Lab, 4 Other (from 33 Con, 3 Other in 2015), CountyC: 21 LD, 21 Con, 16 Lab, 5 Oth from 51 Con, 22 Oth in the early teens. The shires will not come back to the Cons while they continue on this dithering path.
The generational divide keeps getting wider and wider and the last two years which involved locking the young up for a disease that barely affects them did not help.
Nor does the fact that the average house earned more by rising £33k in value last year than the average person earned last year (£31k).
The more people who are locked out of having a stake in society, the worse things will get.
1. Planning reform 2. The imbalance of wealth vs income tax 3. Underinvestment in R&D and infra 4. Repair of economic relationships with EU 5. The impoverishment of younger people 6. The imbalance between north and south
The opportunity still remains for the UK to be a lowish-tax, highish-solidarity entrepôt and magnet for the world’s most talented people.
It could even aim to outpace Germany as the largest nation by GDP in Europe.
If it wants.
It seems not to want.
I think 3 will improve post Brexit - the perfectly elastic workforce we had in the EU was not helpful wrt investing in productivity enhancing technology. The productivity puzzle is largely explained by such a factor (indeed my employer has finally invested in such tech, at my lobbying, over continuing to expand grad intakes). On to other 5 areas they get a D- at best.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
I am heartened to find a general, latent Anglophilia in New York at least. It’s surprised me.
We think Brits classier (in a good way), smarter, sexier (in some way) and more (weirdly or not) more authentic.
We really are a bunch of dumb-asses, aren't we?
I’m a great admirer of the American project. So, no, not dumb-ass, even as I whinge and moan about the food and the guns etc in my passive aggressive Anglo-Kiwi, protestant way.
Being from NZ, you've got it made in US. Like being Brit but without baggage. Plus Lord of the Rings!
As long as you don't beat up on the Maori . . . and point out they're the guys who did in the dodo . . .
The moa, you mean. Yes, being from NZ is a great privilege. Nobody has a beef with NZers.
1. Planning reform 2. The imbalance of wealth vs income tax 3. Underinvestment in R&D and infra 4. Repair of economic relationships with EU 5. The impoverishment of younger people 6. The imbalance between north and south
The opportunity still remains for the UK to be a lowish-tax, highish-solidarity entrepôt and magnet for the world’s most talented people.
It could even aim to outpace Germany as the largest nation by GDP in Europe.
If it wants.
It seems not to want.
Your list reminds me of reading diaries of Harold Macmillan and Richard Crossman. Underlining your point.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
I am heartened to find a general, latent Anglophilia in New York at least. It’s surprised me.
We think Brits classier (in a good way), smarter, sexier (in some way) and more (weirdly or not) more authentic.
We really are a bunch of dumb-asses, aren't we?
I’m a great admirer of the American project. So, no, not dumb-ass, even as I whinge and moan about the food and the guns etc in my passive aggressive Anglo-Kiwi, protestant way.
Being from NZ, you've got it made in US. Like being Brit but without baggage. Plus Lord of the Rings!
As long as you don't beat up on the Maori . . . and point out they're the guys who did in the dodo . . .
Its the bastards who ate all the Elephant birds I have a problem with.
1. Planning reform 2. The imbalance of wealth vs income tax 3. Underinvestment in R&D and infra 4. Repair of economic relationships with EU 5. The impoverishment of younger people 6. The imbalance between north and south
The opportunity still remains for the UK to be a lowish-tax, highish-solidarity entrepôt and magnet for the world’s most talented people.
It could even aim to outpace Germany as the largest nation by GDP in Europe.
If it wants.
It seems not to want.
I think 3 will improve post Brexit - the perfectly elastic workforce we had in the EU was not helpful wrt investing in productivity enhancing technology. The productivity puzzle is largely explained by such a factor (indeed my employer has finally invested in such tech, at my lobbying, over continuing to expand grad intakes). On to other 5 areas they get a D- at best.
Well I thoroughly disagree with you on that, but I sense we’ve had this argument before.
I totally believe in the productivity and profitability impact of talented migration, which was my personal experience as a migrant, an employee, and an employer.
1. Planning reform 2. The imbalance of wealth vs income tax 3. Underinvestment in R&D and infra 4. Repair of economic relationships with EU 5. The impoverishment of younger people 6. The imbalance between north and south
The opportunity still remains for the UK to be a lowish-tax, highish-solidarity entrepôt and magnet for the world’s most talented people.
It could even aim to outpace Germany as the largest nation by GDP in Europe.
If it wants.
It seems not to want.
I think 3 will improve post Brexit - the perfectly elastic workforce we had in the EU was not helpful wrt investing in productivity enhancing technology. The productivity puzzle is largely explained by such a factor (indeed my employer has finally invested in such tech, at my lobbying, over continuing to expand grad intakes). On to other 5 areas they get a D- at best.
Well I thoroughly disagree with you on that, but I sense we’ve had this argument before.
I totally believe in the productivity and profitability impact of talented migration, which was my personal experience as a migrant, an employee, and an employer.
Mileage differs of course.
I'm not sure we have, but sense that if we did, opinions wouldn't be changed.
Talented migration is 100% the sort of thing the UK should be pursuing, but has been neglecting, e.g, the visa grants for exceptional academics should include 10+ visas for them to bring over/recruit their team, but on the mid-less talented end of the spectrum (where the majority of productivity gains can be had) we have been far too lax.
1. Planning reform 2. The imbalance of wealth vs income tax 3. Underinvestment in R&D and infra 4. Repair of economic relationships with EU 5. The impoverishment of younger people 6. The imbalance between north and south
The opportunity still remains for the UK to be a lowish-tax, highish-solidarity entrepôt and magnet for the world’s most talented people.
It could even aim to outpace Germany as the largest nation by GDP in Europe.
If it wants.
It seems not to want.
FPTP fucks the political will out of everything. Consequently the (voting) demographics and their distribution mean we're beholden to the retirees for a good while.
Nobody has mentioned Film 4 much, yet it seems to underpin the entire British film industry and indeed has an reputation for investing in young talent.
It would pure vandalism to see it privatised and thereby destroyed. Indeed, it should be further invested in.
Film4 budget is absolutely tiny, its like £30 million a year. Netflix are spending a £1bn a year, Sky have invested in a massive production facility at Elstree and are spending £1.5bn over 5 years.
Yeah, and look at what it achieves nonetheless.
But to say it underpins the entire British film industry is demonstrably untrue. Its funds some interesting niche movies, which is fine. But what is underpinning the UK tv and film industry is the likes of the massive investment by Sky Studios.
My understanding, which is based on talking to industry contacts, but may be false, is that Four specifically targets young talent.
10,000 people are working on Netflix original productions in the UK and they made 60 shows last year. If that isn't developing young talent, I would be shocked.
I think it’s healthy to have a funding stream for British stories and talent that’s not completely beholden to what plays in Peoria.
The same folks pushing for further privatisations will be bemoaning the lack of good British productions when everything goes through a commissioning editor in California.
They’re also often the same people who quiver with priapic patriotism when we hear that the BBC has invested in its Ukrainian service because of increased demand.
People who get angry at the Beeb WS/foreign editions are those who never travel. It is enormously well respected overseas, e.g. pre-war it could claim to regularly reach over 1% of Russians. Ringfencing, at the very least, or expansion of its' budget should be a top priority of any government. An extra £0.5bn/yr would make a really positive difference for it, and should arguably be included in the defence budget.
Britain is kind of soft power superpower. At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
In America the name BBC is golden. Quintessentially British in very best way, that's how we've regarded it, for over eighty years now.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
I am heartened to find a general, latent Anglophilia in New York at least. It’s surprised me.
We think Brits classier (in a good way), smarter, sexier (in some way) and more (weirdly or not) more authentic.
We really are a bunch of dumb-asses, aren't we?
I’m a great admirer of the American project. So, no, not dumb-ass, even as I whinge and moan about the food and the guns etc in my passive aggressive Anglo-Kiwi, protestant way.
Being from NZ, you've got it made in US. Like being Brit but without baggage. Plus Lord of the Rings!
As long as you don't beat up on the Maori . . . and point out they're the guys who did in the dodo . . .
Its the bastards who ate all the Elephant birds I have a problem with.
Elephant Bird asks - does my bum look big in this?
I’m eating the Toblerone from my minibar, because the food in Izmir is so bad
Why stay there? Only an hour down the road to Selcuk to see Ephesus. Perfectly good restaurants there.
Or push on to Kusadasi for some wonderful seafront fish restaurants.
But the sea is right here. I can view it from my hotel
I do wonder if the terrible inflation crisis is making yer generally mediocre Turkish food much worse than normal
Turkish food is never great, It has always been overrated by its fans (like Lebanese). I’ve been here too many times and been sorely disappointed.
But this is a new level of dire
I liked Ephesus, but was more impressed at looking down on the River Menderes (Maiandros in Greek) and twigging the origin of the English verb.
Any recommendations of how to do Ephesus? 3 hours enough? Avoid local bars? Take a flask of arak?
These days my culture ceiling runs at about 60-90 minutes, and I was in Ephesus a long while ago. So perhaps not the person to ask.
I think the Library is the main thing, and the museum and amphitheatre. Then the rest is just wandering around to breath in the scale of things. You will probably have seen way better ruins. But it is nice to sit down with a Turkish tea or coffee and take in the surroundings.
Temple of Diana?
You bin there? There's exactly one column left standing
Comments
a) The oil companies do not set the price, the market does. It is not a case of not passing it on. It sells at the market price, so this nonsense of taxing companies extra who don't pass it on is just that, nonsense as it is not within their control.
b) Increasing fracking in the UK has practically no impact on global prices so prices won't come down. Of course it will if global production increased BUT you didn't say that. You were specifically talking about the UK only initially. You said 'we', you referred to UK fracking, you referred to UK coal mines, you referred to Starmer. This is all UK.
c) You then referred to the UK companies having to pass on a price reduction, whatever that means. As pointed out by myself and others that is impossible in a global market place. It is only possible in authoritarian states typically communist where pricing can be state controlled internally ignoring the true market.
When I was growing up in NZ in the 80s, cheese came in 1kg blocks.
The choice was Mild, Medium, or “Tasty” cheddar.
There was one other cheese available called “Colby”.
Some years later I was curious about this colby and looked it up on Wikipedia. Lo and behold it’s another form of bloody cheddar.
Things have moved on a bit to be fair.
New Orleans and Louisiana are exceptional.
I agree with the general sentiments on this thread.
I’m talking about the USA en masse.
That isn't to say they don't fund some interesting films, but its just totally dwarfed by what the big boys are now investing in UK tv and film production.
Tho for melting purposes, a very extreme Cheddar is heard to beat. Cornish Cove, say
https://www.barb.co.uk/the-barb-panel-2/?msclkid=ef572495b53211ec9ce54f29c80f32e2
Having been in this room for about six months now, it strikes my how many posters who I first knew from very anti government posts are actually Conservative voters, even members and canvassers in past, but lapsed (apart from holding their nose to rightly keep Corbyn out). That could so easily have been me.
I realise now I also stand with them HY. There is a difference between us in your not calling out this government for what it is. Wether you like what it is or not, there should be the acknowledgement it is not conservatism.
As a proper Conservative I reject all forms of populism. Populism pushes the idea of popular sovereignty above the independence of democratic institutions, and the professionalism of the representatives of those institutions. Where populism doesn’t like government, politics or politicians, as true Conservatives we will oppose that populism. There are always divisions of interest and opinion, but itis duty of all democratic politicians to take account of them. This means there is a legitimacy to all opposition, and your opponents and their opinions, in politics, or in the press, deserve respect. But we have a government and leadership who operate with such disregard for the checks and balances of democratic structure, ignoring or circumventing wherever they can.
I believe, if Tugendhat or anyone wants to run from the back benches against Boris and his cronies, building their bid on the paragraph I just gave them, Big Dog goes the way of the Dodo.
All these companies need the high quality blue chip stuff to get people to sign-up and continue their subscriptions. Then yes they have some filler to try and make sure people default to using it when they come in the house.
Among strange examples, the best Italian sandwich (hoggie/grinder) I've ever enjoyed, was in a small local chain Italian restaurant in Ironton, Ohio. A place barely noted - and certainly NOT for fine dining!
Must be some gems tucked away in odd corners of Gotham, certainly to compete with Appalachia?
b) Increased fracking in the UK obviously increases supply in the UK and that will in turn have some impact on cutting prices in the UK. Though yes we need more fracking and shale extraction globally for a major difference.
I’m a bit peeved because I’m on the UWS and it’s not Midtown or Brooklyn which is where most of the good restaurants are these days.
(I used to stay Midtown when I came to NY for work).
Plus I usually have my family with me and the kids wants burger, chicken strips, or something similarly beige.
Partygate: ministers refuse to disclose pictures taken by No 10 photographers
Cabinet Office won’t confirm or deny existence of taxpayer-funded pictures of illegal gatherings after freedom of information request
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/05/partygate-ministers-refuse-to-disclose-pictures-taken-by-no-10-photographers
(In the DC area, that sometimes inspired a bitter joke, after a government friendly to the United States fell: "Lose a country, gain a restaurant.")
In the Seattle area that has meant, for example, a decline in the number of good Japanese restaurants over recent decades, and an increase in Mexican restaurants. (I much prefer the former.)
Similarly, I would expect that New York City has fewer Jewish delis than it once did.
> when I was a boy in WVa, once a year local Mason Lodge would hand out small New Testaments (revised King James) to students in public school classes. This was VERY common back then; my father also got a free NT when HE was a school kid in Pa thirty years before.
Beside that, no religion in my public schools, except for silent prayer before exams. Lot of talk then about prayer in school, but little organized except occasionally by some student or teacher who was regarded as a religious nut. Interesting, fact that town of less than 5k had 20+ churches was a LIMITING factor, since by definition Protestant denominations & congregations were deeply split over . . . . wait for it . . . religion.
> at Louisiana State University one of the notable campus celebrities was "Holy Hubert" who regularly smote the entire student body chapter and verse for our manifold sins and wickedness, speaking from a soap box or some such on the Parade Ground. Often he'd bee joined by a female evangelist, Sister Sadie I think. Frat boys enjoyed heckling and hooting and think HH and SS enjoyed that too, despite their seeming condemnation.
Once I was returning to LSU from a trip back home, via bus, and climbed into a Greyhound for last leg from New Orleans to Baton Rouge. When I old guy sat down next too me, and started talking up a storm.
I soon realized - to my horror - that my companion for next hour & half was none other than Holy Humbert. Who shortly informed me that he was not merely the Messenger of the Lord, but that he WAS the Lord.
It was a long strange ride.
My point was your claims that Film4 is the backbone of UK tv and film is just nonsense now. The game has completely changed. Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Sky, BBC, all spend mega bucks on production.
Film4 might have been 10 years ago, but its the equivalent of saying that Cornish bloke on Bodmin Moor who works with car engines to make knives is the backbone of high end car engineering in the UK, rather than say Rolls Royce or Bentley.
Of course its good there are such people, but the training and apprentice schemes via Rolls and Bentley is far more people to careers in that industry.
I’m not sure you have.
Again, quantity is not quality.
You still don't get commodity pricing. Can you not get it into your head that oil production companies don't set oil prices, it is the market that does. That is why they are currently getting a windfall. Increased production in the UK helps our economy but has no impact on pricing at all as the price is set globally by the global marketplace and this extra input into it is trivial. The UK companies sell in this market. If you make them sell at a lower price they will simply stop UK operations.
I'm stopping now as you are clearly as ignorant of economics as most other subjects you pontificate upon.
My most notable NYC dining experience was at Max's Kansas City in 1972. Mostly because somebody at nearby table was smoking weed.
Look, I’m not arguing to have Netflix banned.
I am arguing to preserve a production/funding capability that will be closed down once asset strippers are let in.
As for the rest of Channel 4, it was interesting to read @WhisperingOracle’s account of the 1990 reforms. I chiefly know 4 as the home of Big Brother which as far as I’m concerned pioneered “Cruel TV”. Hardly a public service.
Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom have vowed to expand cooperation on hypersonic weapons under the AUKUS pact as the three countries press on with the trilateral plan to develop nuclear-powered submarines for the Royal Australian Navy.
At least, its streets ahead of its European peers.
The current government, and in fact successive governments generally, seem not to realise this.
Channel 4 privatisation and the disastrous merger of the FCO with DfID are part of the same philistinism.
My family went years ago to a small Vietnamese place in Ashland, Kentucky. Which is NOT notably cosmopolitan (except for Miley Cyrus's daddy). They had a nice meal, and at the end asked the very nice young Vietnamese waitress for a "doggy bag".
When she returned to their table, she was carrying rather full shopping bag. When my folks asked, what? the young woman replied, oh, since you're taking what you didn't eat home for your pet, thought the dog might also like what other diners left.
When she was told real meaning of phrase "doggy bag" they all had a good laugh!
Please don’t get me started.
Not least because the UK is asleep and nobody is on here late at night to hear my ravings.
Thatcher would be fucking fumin’.
Have also noticed what you might call bump in true (as opposed to false) Louisiana restaurants in the Emerald City post-Katrina.
The problem is, it appears to be total dogshit.
I think Corbyn project actually identified a lot of real problems (and I think Big Dom also was good at that). The problem is Corbyn solution was always to open the Labour manifesto of the 1970s and copy / paste it, and Big Dom was well what we need to do is burn it all down, hire a couple of tech bros on £500k a year and they will use Machine Learning and AI to fix it.
And we are not alone in this world.
Of course, not having to pay the license fee IS a plus. Real reason for high esteem of BBC in USA is that we consider it a standard of quality and a mark of integrity.
ADDENDUM - I say this after having watched many a crap Brit sit-com on PBS some truly dreadful dreck.
First to fatigued Blairism/Brownism, then to austerity, then to Brexit and now to a generally dishonest populism.
We really are a bunch of dumb-asses, aren't we?
EDIT - Also an Anglophobic layer there. Less on East and Left Coasts, bit more in the Heatland.
One way expressed is use of mock-English accents generally implying some level of snobbishness or superciliousity.
Rishi, Raab, Truss, Kwasi, and Javid are all Britannia Unchained nutters.
The rest are makeweights.
So, no, not dumb-ass, even as I whinge and moan about the food and the guns etc in my passive aggressive Anglo-Kiwi, protestant way.
Already the effects can be seen. In 2019 Henley was used in multiple articles as an example of somewhere that wouldn't vote Con only in apocalyptic circumstances - Now the Town Council: 13 Ind, 3 Con (from 8-8 in the depths of May's 2017), District council: 13 LD, 10 Con, 6 Grn, 3 Lab, 4 Other (from 33 Con, 3 Other in 2015), CountyC: 21 LD, 21 Con, 16 Lab, 5 Oth from 51 Con, 22 Oth in the early teens. The shires will not come back to the Cons while they continue on this dithering path.
1. Planning reform
2. The imbalance of wealth vs income tax
3. Underinvestment in R&D and infra
4. Repair of economic relationships with EU
5. The impoverishment of younger people
6. The imbalance between north and south
The opportunity still remains for the UK to be a lowish-tax, highish-solidarity entrepôt and magnet for the world’s most talented people.
It could even aim to outpace Germany as the largest nation by GDP in Europe.
If it wants.
It seems not to want.
Secret letters sent from Prince Charles to Jimmy Savile – where the royal begged the paedophile DJ for help with PR and speechwriting
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10689515/Prince-Charles-heaped-praise-Jimmy-Savile-asked-help-fix-Royal-Familys-image.html
As long as you don't beat up on the Maori . . . and point out they're the guys who did in the dodo . . .
Nor does the fact that the average house earned more by rising £33k in value last year than the average person earned last year (£31k).
The more people who are locked out of having a stake in society, the worse things will get.
Yes, being from NZ is a great privilege.
Nobody has a beef with NZers.
I totally believe in the productivity and profitability impact of talented migration, which was my personal experience as a migrant, an employee, and an employer.
Mileage differs of course.
Talented migration is 100% the sort of thing the UK should be pursuing, but has been neglecting, e.g, the visa grants for exceptional academics should include 10+ visas for them to bring over/recruit their team, but on the mid-less talented end of the spectrum (where the majority of productivity gains can be had) we have been far too lax.
This is why I'm long Johnson for 2024.
https://twitter.com/uklabour/status/1511403296057036802?s=21&t=SejQ39mTc9MM7e7QnWY8ZQ
https://cdn.britannica.com/13/127013-050-ECD27F0E/Site-Temple-of-Artemis-Turkey-Ephesus.jpg