@Leon I like some of your posts and some of your travel messages. But I do personally find them a bit tiresome and a bit, well, show-offy. Also rather trite and superficial but I don't mean that to be rude. I just personally like travel to be immersive, which takes time.
You do tend to get angry about different opinions (which people seem to think connects to drinking, but I've never made that association). I was merely suggesting that Nespresso is not the saviour of the fine cup of coffee. Nor is it particularly environmentally friendly which imho really ought to be a significant factor in all our decision making.
And I know you went through hell a while back so I'm not going to get more personal than that.
What plastic waste? Nespresso capsules are aluminium and fully recyclable using the Nespresso funded Podback scheme. The coffee grounds are used for compost and the aluminium is recycled for industrial use.
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
The Odds-on favourite to be next PM after Boris is Keir Starmer at around 9/2
After him it continues to be Conservative MPs who have short odds, some of them extremely short e.g. Jeremy Hunt and Liz Truss at 11/2
So the markets are basically waging here on one of two options
OPTION 1
EITHER Boris Johnson survives until the GE and loses to SKS who becomes PM OR Boris Johnson falls soon and is replaced by a current tory MP
Neither of those bets look like value to me. I see little evidence that Boris Johnson is going anywhere and there's now a massive cloud hanging over SKS. Will the latter survive? Maybe he will but I'd put it no better than 50/50.
Which leaves us with two possibilitie
OPTION 2
EITHER Boris Johnson survives and wins next time OR Boris Johnson loses and another Labour leader becomes PM
The first of those is unlikely in my opinion but not impossible
The value remains in the second.
What is ABSOLUTELY NOT VALUE is betting on Andy Burnham. He was useless last two times (beaten twice), had the personality of a dead haddock, will not appeal to the south, is not even an MP and has the added disadvantage of being a man at a time when Labour need to select a female leader to lance a boil.
(Please don't just do pooh-pooh of this. It's about logic so reply in similar vein please.)
9/2 is not "odds-on". I hope you don't bet serious money.
I do and I've won every bet that I've placed since, and including, the US Presidential elections.
You're right of course and it was an oversight or typo but there's really no need to be a pissy dick about it. Ta.
Anyone who claims to have won every bet they have placed either is not being honest, not a regular gambler, or doesn't understand the principle of "value" in gambling.
Gambling successfully is about finding value.
A fantastically stupid post.
I have won money on every bet I've placed since, and including, the US Presidential elections. What is so difficult for you to get your head around?
Some of those bets have been fab: Chesham & Amersham thanks to Mike. Macron was a good win. LibDems to take Woking was another etc.
I made a lot of money on the US elections, spread betting on Biden when everyone went into flat panic mode based on a sub-set of latino votes in Florida. I went against the market trend and made a lot of money.
Biggest fuck up from me? It wasn't a bet. It was saying the invasion wouldn't happen.
I've no idea what your point was really and I suspect you don't either.
If you didn't understand the point, then you can't have read many of Mike's headers as he's made the point repeatedly.
If you're winning all your bets in a period of time, then that is just dumb luck it isn't smart. Smart political betting isn't about getting all your bets to win, as no gambler will win all their bets, if they did it wouldn't be gambling.
Political betting is about finding value.
I've never seen you make a betting post. Ever. All you ever seem to do is post right-wing, and sometimes quite nasty, rants and personal attacks on me.
So when you make betting posts and are seen to win I will take notice.
You are of course talking illogical rubbish. If I happen to find value and win that's great betting. There's nothing smart about losing.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper as Next PM at odds over 100/1. If that's not a gamble I don't know what the hell is. And they will probably lose but they're value imho.
But you're very close to your aim Phillip of hounding me off this board. Were it not for Big G's nice polite comment I would have given up earlier. I am sick and tired of your bullying, nasty, attacks on me.
I keep an eye on this forum as I like seeing how UK political thought evolves.
Mr Roberts' attacks on you seem to me to be totally unnecessary and as you say nasty. I am not surprised you feel like leaving here when he is being so vicious towards you. What did you say to wind him up or is he just a very unpleasant person?
Play fair people. I see Heatherners posts and think she makes a lot of very sensible points and has come out with some very good tips. That Liberal Democrat win in Woking was impressive.
She just goes a bit over the top on the female and left winger guff but being in a minority probably makes her defensive.
I 19 posts in total, so perhaps you haven't noticed that this individual has been trolling for weeks, often in explicitly racist and sexist ways. S/he has also repeatedly doxxed at least one other poster despite requests to do so (including in the post you quoted), and s/he uses a compromised VPN - and at least one moderator has as much as admitted that s/he should have been banned already.
Come on, it's no secret that BR changed his ID on here after PT was banned. And I only ever called him out because he repeatedly called me a troll.
I am NOT A FUCKING TROLL!!!! I use a VPN. Are you really so stupid that you don't understand the difference?
Why anyone goes online without using a VPN baffles me. Your data is being mined continuosly. That's why I use Windscribe or FreeVPN. It's not complicated but it gives you room to be rude and dismissive.
So every time I'm called a troll by BR I will refer to him by his real name.
It's a reliable thickness indicator, whether a poster thinks you a troll or not
What I don't understand is your and OGH's insistence that Burnham is NOT A BACK without going the extra mile and tipping him as a SCREAMING LAY
Nespresso caps are recyclable aluminium. There are also several other companies (now that Nespresso's patents have lapsed) making recyclable metal caps, even reusable metal caps, if you don't fancy feeding the Nestle monster.
Produces a decent simulacrum of espresso. As good as you’d get from Starbucks. Can’t make a flat white tho
My wife has worked out a way that it can, but you need to buy a little milk warning attachment. Can't vouch for it, though, as I only have the espresso.
My parents bought us a nespresso machine. We've never used it - we got it set up but it turns out you need particularly tiny cups and we didn't have any.
Try it. The espresso is good
The pods are terribly expensive and simply don't represent value. As well as the appalling plastic waste. Do you not care about that?
I have a DeLonghi Eletta Bean to Cup. It's an expensive initial outlay but makes superb coffee of barista standard. Far superior to Nespresso.
There you go. That’s one of your annoying comments
You manage to slight me as a heedless despoiler of the environment, colour yourself as a superior eco-sensitive person, praise yourself for your own good taste, slyly confess that you are wealthy, and add a dash of pompous affectation with the reference to “De Longhi Eletta Bean to Cup”, all in about 3 lines
You’re a wanker
Are you ever sober? Jesus.
Stone cold. Just woke up. Sitting on my balcony reading about the Armenian Genocide
- Chop the onion - Mash, smash etc the garlic - In a pot with a lid, fry onion and garlic with a bit of oil. Cook until they are nice and brown. - Add the mice, chop and turn and break up the mince until all the lumps are gone and it is beginning to brown. - Add the tomatoes. - Add a good squirt of the tomato paste. Add a cap full of the balsamic vinegar. - Stir in. - Put the lid on. Reduce to a simmer (occasional bubble) - cook for 25 minutes - Add salt to taste.
Nespresso caps are recyclable aluminium. There are also several other companies (now that Nespresso's patents have lapsed) making recyclable metal caps, even reusable metal caps, if you don't fancy feeding the Nestle monster.
As a lurker can I suggest that @Applicant you apologise to @Heathener and stop calling her a troll. She obviously isn not a troll so you are being a wind-up. You are confusing her political differences and being bloody rude to her. Likewise @Batholomew but I think you have already agreed to this.
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.
If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.
If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.
Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
Quick question to PB brains trust: can anyone recommend a green building forum?
I used to be on the Navitron forum when we were building our house but that's now closed. Looking for another forum now we're planning our next project. Thanks!
So why are you so infatuated with Oxbridge, public schools and grammar schools @HYUFD? You seem in awe of anyone who goes to these. You seem to treat these people as your betters. They aren't. You are just as worthy.
I went to private school, my sister went to grammar school, my wife has an Oxford degree.
I am not in awe of them, Churchill was a great PM despite being non Oxbridge, Hague would have been a good PM in my view and was comprehensive educated.
However it is no surprise the best schools and universities tend to produce the most PMs
I don't disagree with any of that (although we may disagree on the reason for the last para) and in particular I think Hague would have been a very interesting PM, but you definitely come over as in awe of your 'betters'. And the reason for the ' ' is that they definitely aren't better than you. And this isn't just education, but also with regard to class. You seem to look up to those who are better bred.
The reason I find it strange is I treat everyone equally. It might just be me, I don't know, but I express no deference to anyone and don't expect any myself.
Quite. When I want a surgeon I want a competent one. HYUFD wants a posh one from Clifton who might be sort of better educated and therefore perhaps better trained. Rather different logic.
No, I want someone with top grades in their medical exams and before. You are not bothered by their training as long as you have an excuse for your usual far left, inverse snobbery filled rant
"inverse snobbery" is wanting only a working class surgeon. Which is as far from what i said as you wanting a quiack you can cringe to because he went to Eton and talks posh.
"far left" - maybe from your position as so far to the right of Genghis Khan you're drowning in the Pacific Ocean.
As usual, your logic would shame a pithed marmoset.
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
Valencia, Lisbon?
This is based entirely on a Travel Man I watched the other night, but Split, Croatia, looks brilliant. When I return to the continent it will be high up my list of destinations.
Hmm, this morning's debt yields came in a lot higher than expected, I wonder if there was a mini strike from bond funds. Haven't seen any reports on the sale itself but this is what started happening last time the BoE removed the crutch of QE and put rates up.
Ooh, good spot, and a sign no doubt of the expected future rate rises to come.
As a lurker can I suggest that @Applicant you apologise to @Heathener and stop calling her a troll. She obviously isn not a troll so you are being a wind-up. You are confusing her political differences and being bloody rude to her. Likewise @Batholomew but I think you have already agreed to this.
The comments and words to Heathener are just vile. Openly calling them a troll, Russian, racist, sexist.
Utterly despicable, I will be leaving this site if this continues.
I haven't seen what's going on today, so this is based on the last few days.
The charge of sexism is totally fair. I've had a conversation with Heathener about this, listened to what she's had to say, and my opinion is that it's open sexism. If you're judging specific people to be less worthy of a specific job on the basis of their gender, what else can you call it?
The Odds-on favourite to be next PM after Boris is Keir Starmer at around 9/2
After him it continues to be Conservative MPs who have short odds, some of them extremely short e.g. Jeremy Hunt and Liz Truss at 11/2
So the markets are basically waging here on one of two options
OPTION 1
EITHER Boris Johnson survives until the GE and loses to SKS who becomes PM OR Boris Johnson falls soon and is replaced by a current tory MP
Neither of those bets look like value to me. I see little evidence that Boris Johnson is going anywhere and there's now a massive cloud hanging over SKS. Will the latter survive? Maybe he will but I'd put it no better than 50/50.
Which leaves us with two possibilitie
OPTION 2
EITHER Boris Johnson survives and wins next time OR Boris Johnson loses and another Labour leader becomes PM
The first of those is unlikely in my opinion but not impossible
The value remains in the second.
What is ABSOLUTELY NOT VALUE is betting on Andy Burnham. He was useless last two times (beaten twice), had the personality of a dead haddock, will not appeal to the south, is not even an MP and has the added disadvantage of being a man at a time when Labour need to select a female leader to lance a boil.
(Please don't just do pooh-pooh of this. It's about logic so reply in similar vein please.)
9/2 is not "odds-on". I hope you don't bet serious money.
I do and I've won every bet that I've placed since, and including, the US Presidential elections.
You're right of course and it was an oversight or typo but there's really no need to be a pissy dick about it. Ta.
Anyone who claims to have won every bet they have placed either is not being honest, not a regular gambler, or doesn't understand the principle of "value" in gambling.
Gambling successfully is about finding value.
A fantastically stupid post.
I have won money on every bet I've placed since, and including, the US Presidential elections. What is so difficult for you to get your head around?
Some of those bets have been fab: Chesham & Amersham thanks to Mike. Macron was a good win. LibDems to take Woking was another etc.
I made a lot of money on the US elections, spread betting on Biden when everyone went into flat panic mode based on a sub-set of latino votes in Florida. I went against the market trend and made a lot of money.
Biggest fuck up from me? It wasn't a bet. It was saying the invasion wouldn't happen.
I've no idea what your point was really and I suspect you don't either.
If you didn't understand the point, then you can't have read many of Mike's headers as he's made the point repeatedly.
If you're winning all your bets in a period of time, then that is just dumb luck it isn't smart. Smart political betting isn't about getting all your bets to win, as no gambler will win all their bets, if they did it wouldn't be gambling.
Political betting is about finding value.
I've never seen you make a betting post. Ever. All you ever seem to do is post right-wing, and sometimes quite nasty, rants and personal attacks on me.
So when you make betting posts and are seen to win I will take notice.
You are of course talking illogical rubbish. If I happen to find value and win that's great betting. There's nothing smart about losing.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper as Next PM at odds over 100/1. If that's not a gamble I don't know what the hell is. And they will probably lose but they're value imho.
But you're very close to your aim Phillip of hounding me off this board. Were it not for Big G's nice polite comment I would have given up earlier. I am sick and tired of your bullying, nasty, attacks on me.
I keep an eye on this forum as I like seeing how UK political thought evolves.
Mr Roberts' attacks on you seem to me to be totally unnecessary and as you say nasty. I am not surprised you feel like leaving here when he is being so vicious towards you. What did you say to wind him up or is he just a very unpleasant person?
Play fair people. I see Heatherners posts and think she makes a lot of very sensible points and has come out with some very good tips. That Liberal Democrat win in Woking was impressive.
She just goes a bit over the top on the female and left winger guff but being in a minority probably makes her defensive.
I 19 posts in total, so perhaps you haven't noticed that this individual has been trolling for weeks, often in explicitly racist and sexist ways. S/he has also repeatedly doxxed at least one other poster despite requests to do so (including in the post you quoted), and s/he uses a compromised VPN - and at least one moderator has as much as admitted that s/he should have been banned already.
Come on, it's no secret that BR changed his ID on here after PT was banned. And I only ever called him out because he repeatedly called me a troll.
I am NOT A FUCKING TROLL!!!! I use a VPN. Are you really so stupid that you don't understand the difference?
Why anyone goes online without using a VPN baffles me. Your data is being mined continuosly. That's why I use Windscribe or FreeVPN. It's not complicated but it gives you room to be rude and dismissive.
So every time I'm called a troll by BR I will refer to him by his real name.
It's a reliable thickness indicator, whether a poster thinks you a troll or not
What I don't understand is your and OGH's insistence that Burnham is NOT A BACK without going the extra mile and tipping him as a SCREAMING LAY
He IS a screaming lay but the thing is if Starmer becomes PM then it could be an awful long time until the next LP leader market is settled. Tying up £600 to win £100 in five years plus isn't terribly attractive - particularly when inflation is surging away.
- Chop the onion - Mash, smash etc the garlic - In a pot with a lid, fry onion and garlic with a bit of oil. Cook until they are nice and brown. - Add the mice, chop and turn and break up the mince until all the lumps are gone and it is beginning to brown. - Add the tomatoes. - Add a good squirt of the tomato paste. Add a cap full of the balsamic vinegar. - Stir in. - Put the lid on. Reduce to a simmer (occasional bubble) - cook for 25 minutes - Add salt to taste.
- Chop the onion - Mash, smash etc the garlic - In a pot with a lid, fry onion and garlic with a bit of oil. Cook until they are nice and brown. - Add the mice, chop and turn and break up the mince until all the lumps are gone and it is beginning to brown. - Add the tomatoes. - Add a good squirt of the tomato paste. Add a cap full of the balsamic vinegar. - Stir in. - Put the lid on. Reduce to a simmer (occasional bubble) - cook for 25 minutes - Add salt to taste.
Serve with any old pasta you like.
It's a bit of a ponceyboots ingredient, but those chewy black sweet garlic cloves you get would be nice in that. Omnomnom.
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
Is that true? Bart is suggesting a mega housebuilding programme which would result in falling house prices, I'm pretty sure he's a home owner already so I fail to see how suggesting a scheme that pushes his own asset price down is beneficial to him personally.
I'm in the same camp, we have our own home but I'd dearly love to see the housing market crash so all the landlords and speculators get burned.
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.
If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.
If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.
Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.
There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
jRM is not right about much but he is right that to impose these tests would be an act of self harm.
Yes, implementing a key component of Brexit is an act of self harm.
Doing these checks is not a key component of Brexit. 🤦♂️
I don't recall a single Brexiteer saying "vote Leave in order to get checks on EU produce" do you?
I do recall Brexiteers saying "we should leave the EU as it is too protectionist" and this whole argument just proves the point and is proof positive that leaving the EU was a good idea.
What most Brexiteers wanted, including me, was a FTA with the EU. They now effectively have free trade with us but are still refusing to let us have free trade with them. As others point out this is harmful to them but that is the nature of the ( protectionist) beast.
This is laughable . You’re moaning at the EU for enforcing the terms of the FTA which was agreed with the UK.
If the UK can’t do border checks because of the lack of infrastructure and knock on effect on supply chains it’s their problem not the EUs .
The FTA we have with the EU is nothing of the sort. We wanted a better FTA which allowed free transportation of all goods and services on the back of us having similar standards. The EU thought that this was us having the cake and eating it so they said no. That is a choice that they were entitled to make even although for a bloc with a massive and long running surplus with us it was pretty bloody stupid.
We then have to choose the basis upon which goods are imported into the UK. We have chosen to unilaterally give the EU free trade with us because we think that is the best for us. It is probably one of the reasons, as we saw on the previous thread, that food price inflation is lower in the UK than in the EU or EZ. That is our choice.
They continue to protect their domestic producers from competition from the UK by not allowing free movement of those goods from us. That is a regrettable choice on their part and the government is right to try and persuade them otherwise.
The capability of being able to do border checks is completely irrelevant to this. We never wanted such checks and have now decided not to do them so we do not need the capacity. The lack of enthusiasm about building them was clear evidence that the government never wanted them, something they have now fessed up to.
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
Is that true? Bart is suggesting a mega housebuilding programme which would result in falling house prices, I'm pretty sure he's a home owner already so I fail to see how suggesting a scheme that pushes his own asset price down is beneficial to him personally.
I'm in the same camp, we have our own home but I'd dearly love to see the housing market crash so all the landlords and speculators get burned.
That is very nice of you. When perhaps your investments crash for some reason outside your control and drop to a tiny level of their original worth you can let us know so we can all enjoy the hilarity
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
You can probably do the touristy bits of the three Baltic countries in a week? Or maybe Sweden? @Cicero and/or @StuartDickson would no doubt be happy to advise.
Ah, should have said, I've been to those and I don't want to be running around multiple places, I just want to settle into a hotel somewhere with my laptop and occasionally go out and eat and potter around [place with an interesting vibe].
I can recommend not just a region but an actual hotel. “Diplomats Holidays” in the Pelion Peninsula, Greece
Pelion is stunning. Edenic. Full of Greek myth. Plus forests and mountains and beaches. Not many tourists. Great fish restaurants. It’s wonderful. Hotel will cost you about £40 a night. You will need a car
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
Ignoring the whole Europe v Asia thing, Turkey is allegedly spectacularly cheap atm and ticks all the other boxes
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.
If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.
If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.
Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.
There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.
So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.
If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
- Chop the onion - Mash, smash etc the garlic - In a pot with a lid, fry onion and garlic with a bit of oil. Cook until they are nice and brown. - Add the mice, chop and turn and break up the mince until all the lumps are gone and it is beginning to brown. - Add the tomatoes. - Add a good squirt of the tomato paste. Add a cap full of the balsamic vinegar. - Stir in. - Put the lid on. Reduce to a simmer (occasional bubble) - cook for 25 minutes - Add salt to taste.
Serve with any old pasta you like.
Yum.
MY own comfort food is stovies - onions sliced and potatoes coarsely sliced in a range of sizes, and put in a pan with some dripping/meat stock and a tablespoon or two of water and steamed till pasty, with a range of degrees of cooking of the potato - some al dente, others completely collapsed. Serve with pickled beetroot and sliced cold meat, lamb for preference but pheasant, ham etc will do.
I once saw 'labskaus' on the menu in Copenhagen and ordered it out of curiosity and it turned out to be exactly the same as above. Though there are times abroad when some home comfort food is just what one needs for a change.
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.
If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.
If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.
Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
You can probably do the touristy bits of the three Baltic countries in a week? Or maybe Sweden? @Cicero and/or @StuartDickson would no doubt be happy to advise.
Ah, should have said, I've been to those and I don't want to be running around multiple places, I just want to settle into a hotel somewhere with my laptop and occasionally go out and eat and potter around [place with an interesting vibe].
I can recommend not just a region but an actual hotel. “Diplomats Holidays” in the Pelion Peninsula, Greece
Pelion is stunning. Edenic. Full of Greek myth. Plus forests and mountains and beaches. Not many tourists. Great fish restaurants. It’s wonderful. Hotel will cost you about £40 a night. You will need a car
Good to see you taking sneaky pics of a young man bathing Leon. Unleash your inner homo and banish that phobia.
Produces a decent simulacrum of espresso. As good as you’d get from Starbucks. Can’t make a flat white tho
My wife has worked out a way that it can, but you need to buy a little milk warning attachment. Can't vouch for it, though, as I only have the espresso.
My parents bought us a nespresso machine. We've never used it - we got it set up but it turns out you need particularly tiny cups and we didn't have any.
Try it. The espresso is good
The pods are terribly expensive and simply don't represent value. As well as the appalling plastic waste. Do you not care about that?
I have a DeLonghi Eletta Bean to Cup. It's an expensive initial outlay but makes superb coffee of barista standard. Far superior to Nespresso.
There you go. That’s one of your annoying comments
You manage to slight me as a heedless despoiler of the environment, colour yourself as a superior eco-sensitive person, praise yourself for your own good taste, slyly confess that you are wealthy, and add a dash of pompous affectation with the reference to “De Longhi Eletta Bean to Cup”, all in about 3 lines
You’re a wanker
Are you ever sober? Jesus.
Stone cold. Just woke up. Sitting on my balcony reading about the Armenian Genocide
Incredible book btw. Heartily recommend it
Can't make it out from the picture - what is it ?
Armenian Golgotha, by Grigoris Balakian
Slightly slow start, but when he gets to the eye witness account of the genocide, my God
It’s right up there with the famous memoirs about Auschwitz. Perhaps more impactful because so much of it is unknown - and I consider myself quite well read, historically
eg I had no idea so much of the genocide happened in northern Syria. I never knew that Armenians lived there in large numbers. Perhaps I didn’t know because the Turks killed them all, so there’s none left
Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?
Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.
“Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.
We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.
You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.
If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.
We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.
Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs May 12, 2016 In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries. When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK. Commenting, Boris Johnson said:
'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.
‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.
‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.
We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
Oh give over.
We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
You're kind of right actually.
Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?
I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.
I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.
Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?
Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?
Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?
I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.
I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.
I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.
If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.
If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.
Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.
There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.
So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.
If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
In what ways are planning rules any more anti-libertarian than the rules you have just suggested? Keep the planning laws, by all means reform, but no planning is about as silly as removing the restrictions you just mentioned. Good attempt though "Bart", but nil points for debate!
From the Beeb - Ukraine claims 26,350 Russian troops have been killed. They also claim the total equipment losses from Russia are:
1,187 tanks 2,856 armoured combat vehicles 528 artillery systems 185 multiple launch rocket systems eight air defence systems 199 aircraft 160 helicopters 290 unmanned aerial vehicles 94 cruise missiles 12 ships or boats 1,997 motor vehicles and tank trucks 41 special equipment units
Staggering numbers.
If you put a zero on the end the Ukrainians are winning even more!
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
Ignoring the whole Europe v Asia thing, Turkey is allegedly spectacularly cheap atm and ticks all the other boxes
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
Ignoring the whole Europe v Asia thing, Turkey is allegedly spectacularly cheap atm and ticks all the other boxes
As I am writing this on a balcony overlooking the Turkish Aegean, I can confirm all this is absolutely true
- Chop the onion - Mash, smash etc the garlic - In a pot with a lid, fry onion and garlic with a bit of oil. Cook until they are nice and brown. - Add the mice, chop and turn and break up the mince until all the lumps are gone and it is beginning to brown. - Add the tomatoes. - Add a good squirt of the tomato paste. Add a cap full of the balsamic vinegar. - Stir in. - Put the lid on. Reduce to a simmer (occasional bubble) - cook for 25 minutes - Add salt to taste.
Serve with any old pasta you like.
It's a bit of a ponceyboots ingredient, but those chewy black sweet garlic cloves you get would be nice in that. Omnomnom.
Oddly enough Ms C is making a Spag Bol for this evening. Mince yes, mice no, though.
And Happy Birthday Mr S. From one Taurean to another!
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
Ignoring the whole Europe v Asia thing, Turkey is allegedly spectacularly cheap atm and ticks all the other boxes
Istanbul would be lovely in September, and plenty to see and do.
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
You can probably do the touristy bits of the three Baltic countries in a week? Or maybe Sweden? @Cicero and/or @StuartDickson would no doubt be happy to advise.
Ah, should have said, I've been to the baltic countries and I don't want to be running around multiple places, I just want to settle into a hotel somewhere with my laptop and occasionally go out and eat and potter around [place with an interesting vibe].
Personal favourites - Sevilla (not next week!!), Montpellier, Lisbon, Funchal/Madeira, Castles of the Loire, Cotes du Rhone wine area. If it's exercise you are after, what about a low level alpine resort or the walking in the Sorrento peninsula? Or natural hot spring spa esorts (lots in Hungary, Italy - good food and wine as well).
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
You can probably do the touristy bits of the three Baltic countries in a week? Or maybe Sweden? @Cicero and/or @StuartDickson would no doubt be happy to advise.
Ah, should have said, I've been to the baltic countries and I don't want to be running around multiple places, I just want to settle into a hotel somewhere with my laptop and occasionally go out and eat and potter around [place with an interesting vibe].
Going to Kalkan Turkey again in 10 days. The Kalkan Regency is brilliant available through Simpson Travel -do accommodation only but pick up from the airport)- only 40 rooms family run, in former fishing town with lots of excellent restaurants - wonderful Roman/Lycian stuff all deserted! -especially Patara. Only disadvantage just about every one is from the UK but as hour and a half from Dalaman airport and no big hotels not too many children. Were there a couple of years ago Imelda Staunton and her daughter were there too.
I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.
I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.
Where to go?
You can probably do the touristy bits of the three Baltic countries in a week? Or maybe Sweden? @Cicero and/or @StuartDickson would no doubt be happy to advise.
Ah, should have said, I've been to the baltic countries and I don't want to be running around multiple places, I just want to settle into a hotel somewhere with my laptop and occasionally go out and eat and potter around [place with an interesting vibe].
Personal favourites - Sevilla (not next week!!), Montpellier, Lisbon, Funchal/Madeira, Castles of the Loire, Cotes du Rhone wine area. If it's exercise you are after, what about a low level alpine resort or the walking in the Sorrento peninsula? Or natural hot spring spa esorts (lots in Hungary, Italy - good food and wine as well).
The Odds-on favourite to be next PM after Boris is Keir Starmer at around 9/2
After him it continues to be Conservative MPs who have short odds, some of them extremely short e.g. Jeremy Hunt and Liz Truss at 11/2
So the markets are basically waging here on one of two options
OPTION 1
EITHER Boris Johnson survives until the GE and loses to SKS who becomes PM OR Boris Johnson falls soon and is replaced by a current tory MP
Neither of those bets look like value to me. I see little evidence that Boris Johnson is going anywhere and there's now a massive cloud hanging over SKS. Will the latter survive? Maybe he will but I'd put it no better than 50/50.
Which leaves us with two possibilitie
OPTION 2
EITHER Boris Johnson survives and wins next time OR Boris Johnson loses and another Labour leader becomes PM
The first of those is unlikely in my opinion but not impossible
The value remains in the second.
What is ABSOLUTELY NOT VALUE is betting on Andy Burnham. He was useless last two times (beaten twice), had the personality of a dead haddock, will not appeal to the south, is not even an MP and has the added disadvantage of being a man at a time when Labour need to select a female leader to lance a boil.
(Please don't just do pooh-pooh of this. It's about logic so reply in similar vein please.)
9/2 is not "odds-on". I hope you don't bet serious money.
I do and I've won every bet that I've placed since, and including, the US Presidential elections.
You're right of course and it was an oversight or typo but there's really no need to be a pissy dick about it. Ta.
Anyone who claims to have won every bet they have placed either is not being honest, not a regular gambler, or doesn't understand the principle of "value" in gambling.
Gambling successfully is about finding value.
A fantastically stupid post.
I have won money on every bet I've placed since, and including, the US Presidential elections. What is so difficult for you to get your head around?
Some of those bets have been fab: Chesham & Amersham thanks to Mike. Macron was a good win. LibDems to take Woking was another etc.
I made a lot of money on the US elections, spread betting on Biden when everyone went into flat panic mode based on a sub-set of latino votes in Florida. I went against the market trend and made a lot of money.
Biggest fuck up from me? It wasn't a bet. It was saying the invasion wouldn't happen.
I've no idea what your point was really and I suspect you don't either.
If you didn't understand the point, then you can't have read many of Mike's headers as he's made the point repeatedly.
If you're winning all your bets in a period of time, then that is just dumb luck it isn't smart. Smart political betting isn't about getting all your bets to win, as no gambler will win all their bets, if they did it wouldn't be gambling.
Political betting is about finding value.
I've never seen you make a betting post. Ever. All you ever seem to do is post right-wing, and sometimes quite nasty, rants and personal attacks on me.
So when you make betting posts and are seen to win I will take notice.
You are of course talking illogical rubbish. If I happen to find value and win that's great betting. There's nothing smart about losing.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper as Next PM at odds over 100/1. If that's not a gamble I don't know what the hell is. And they will probably lose but they're value imho.
But you're very close to your aim Phillip of hounding me off this board. Were it not for Big G's nice polite comment I would have given up earlier. I am sick and tired of your bullying, nasty, attacks on me.
I keep an eye on this forum as I like seeing how UK political thought evolves.
Mr Roberts' attacks on you seem to me to be totally unnecessary and as you say nasty. I am not surprised you feel like leaving here when he is being so vicious towards you. What did you say to wind him up or is he just a very unpleasant person?
Play fair people. I see Heatherners posts and think she makes a lot of very sensible points and has come out with some very good tips. That Liberal Democrat win in Woking was impressive.
She just goes a bit over the top on the female and left winger guff but being in a minority probably makes her defensive.
Thank you.
I annoyed BR because I named him from his previous iteration on here and called him out for his comments on Northern Ireland, which I thought were vile. He has never got over it.
I'm on the verge of giving up on pb. It's a bear pit. A very tough place to be a woman and one left-of-centre at that. I find the only way to keep my head above water on here is to try to fight (Leon) but it's grinding me down.
No it isn't. I have been on here for some years and write thread headers too. Occasionally people have been unpleasant but I either ignore them or tell them to stop.
I could if I wanted be really vicious back but I choose not to be. Personal arguments between posters are very dreary, almost as bad as the endless reports on sports and F1. But they are all easy to ignore.
There are not many women on here so I would encourage you to stay.
From the Beeb - Ukraine claims 26,350 Russian troops have been killed. They also claim the total equipment losses from Russia are:
1,187 tanks 2,856 armoured combat vehicles 528 artillery systems 185 multiple launch rocket systems eight air defence systems 199 aircraft 160 helicopters 290 unmanned aerial vehicles 94 cruise missiles 12 ships or boats 1,997 motor vehicles and tank trucks 41 special equipment units
Staggering numbers.
If you put a zero on the end the Ukrainians are winning even more!
From the Beeb - Ukraine claims 26,350 Russian troops have been killed. They also claim the total equipment losses from Russia are:
1,187 tanks 2,856 armoured combat vehicles 528 artillery systems 185 multiple launch rocket systems eight air defence systems 199 aircraft 160 helicopters 290 unmanned aerial vehicles 94 cruise missiles 12 ships or boats 1,997 motor vehicles and tank trucks 41 special equipment units
Staggering numbers.
If you put a zero on the end the Ukrainians are winning even more!
What do you think or the Oryx numbers?
I think they are the most accurate indicator we have. The Russia and Ukrainian governments are compulsive liars on the subject for obvious reasons.
Oryx have been the real winners of World War Z with a greatly enhanced reputation. Even Baldy Ben quotes their numbers now.
Comments
What I don't understand is your and OGH's insistence that Burnham is NOT A BACK without going the extra mile and tipping him as a SCREAMING LAY
Usually when we are seeking a neutral subject the fallback is cheese.
Ingredients
- 450g pack of mince
- Onion
- Clove of garlic
- Balsamic vinegar
- Tomato paste (tube)
- 2 cans chopped tomatoes
Method
- Chop the onion
- Mash, smash etc the garlic
- In a pot with a lid, fry onion and garlic with a bit of oil. Cook until they are nice and brown.
- Add the mice, chop and turn and break up the mince until all the lumps are gone and it is beginning to brown.
- Add the tomatoes.
- Add a good squirt of the tomato paste. Add a cap full of the balsamic vinegar.
- Stir in.
- Put the lid on. Reduce to a simmer (occasional bubble) - cook for 25 minutes
- Add salt to taste.
Serve with any old pasta you like.
And @Heathener stop doxxing. It is not nice.
Play nice people. Surely it is good to respect and welcome alternative views to our own?
If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.
If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.
Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
"far left" - maybe from your position as so far to the right of Genghis Khan you're drowning in the Pacific Ocean.
As usual, your logic would shame a pithed marmoset.
The charge of sexism is totally fair. I've had a conversation with Heathener about this, listened to what she's had to say, and my opinion is that it's open sexism. If you're judging specific people to be less worthy of a specific job on the basis of their gender, what else can you call it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVPbPBsKqsU
I'm in the same camp, we have our own home but I'd dearly love to see the housing market crash so all the landlords and speculators get burned.
There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
We then have to choose the basis upon which goods are imported into the UK. We have chosen to unilaterally give the EU free trade with us because we think that is the best for us. It is probably one of the reasons, as we saw on the previous thread, that food price inflation is lower in the UK than in the EU or EZ. That is our choice.
They continue to protect their domestic producers from competition from the UK by not allowing free movement of those goods from us. That is a regrettable choice on their part and the government is right to try and persuade them otherwise.
The capability of being able to do border checks is completely irrelevant to this. We never wanted such checks and have now decided not to do them so we do not need the capacity. The lack of enthusiasm about building them was clear evidence that the government never wanted them, something they have now fessed up to.
http://www.booking.com/Share-0Y8QvK
This is what it looks like
Pelion is stunning. Edenic. Full of Greek myth. Plus forests and mountains and beaches. Not many tourists. Great fish restaurants. It’s wonderful. Hotel will cost you about £40 a night. You will need a car
So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.
If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
MY own comfort food is stovies - onions sliced and potatoes coarsely sliced in a range of sizes, and put in a pan with some dripping/meat stock and a tablespoon or two of water and steamed till pasty, with a range of degrees of cooking of the potato - some al dente, others completely collapsed. Serve with pickled beetroot and sliced cold meat, lamb for preference but pheasant, ham etc will do.
I once saw 'labskaus' on the menu in Copenhagen and ordered it out of curiosity and it turned out to be exactly the same as above. Though there are times abroad when some home comfort food is just what one needs for a change.
Many happy returns to OGH.
Slightly slow start, but when he gets to the eye witness account of the genocide, my God
It’s right up there with the famous memoirs about Auschwitz. Perhaps more impactful because so much of it is unknown - and I consider myself quite well read, historically
eg I had no idea so much of the genocide happened in northern Syria. I never knew that Armenians lived there in large numbers. Perhaps I didn’t know because the Turks killed them all, so there’s none left
And Happy Birthday Mr S. From one Taurean to another!
I hope no rodents in your pasta, times aren't that bad, yet.
https://magazine.vitality.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Sete-Cidades-_-azores.com_-1170x731.jpg
I could if I wanted be really vicious back but I choose not to be. Personal arguments between posters are very dreary, almost as bad as the endless reports on sports and F1. But they are all easy to ignore.
There are not many women on here so I would encourage you to stay.
Oryx have been the real winners of World War Z with a greatly enhanced reputation. Even Baldy Ben quotes their numbers now.