The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Johnson announcing he signed a major trade agreement with the assumption the other side would not enforce it is a bold take on how international diplomacy works.
I said repeatedly take media reports of legislation today with salt, nothing was ever officially confirmed, it was quite clearly kit flying.
On the latter though, the EU have had no need or reason to seek to enforce the Protocol so dogmatically and to do so is completely counterproductive and not in keeping with the Good Friday Agreement. They're putting the "integrity" of their market ahead of peace in Northern Ireland or the GFA they claimed they wanted to protect.
Had the same Protocol been implemented with sensitivity and care and genuine risk assessments it would have been much better.
Thankfully though the Protocol came with Safeguards and they should be exercised. It is well past time to invoke Article 16 and use it to legally suspend the Protocol's implementation until all parties (including the DUP) are satisfied with a deal going forwards.
Note in passing that The Sun correctly refers to a quadruple and not tetralogy or tetrapak or whatever term Scouse pseuds use.
Should the punter cash out the bet for £22,000 or let it run? Current odds for the remaining two legs are: 7/1 Premier League; 8/15 Champions League.
I just do not see City losing or drawing at home to Villa next Sunday so I would take the 22k without hesitation
But then I do not bet and I am cautious
Sadly I think you're right.
I'd love Stevie G and Coutinho to have an incredible late opportunity to help win the League for Liverpool, but that's fairytale stuff I can't see it actually happening.
Can anyone explain what Andrew Bailey is up to with the "don't take a pay rise" remarks?
It's obvious what the reaction would be and the BoE loses credibility. It's a classic prisoner's dilemma - I get the thinking, but no chance I'm following that advice myself.
Maybe putting pressure on UKGov to freeze public sector pay?
Who knows what Bailey is up to. This is the guy who hasn't even started quantitative tightening on the £800b QE assets even though inflation is raging out of control.
Inflation is raging out of control for supply side reasons: the pandemic screwed manufacturing supply lines, especially from China; chip shortages mean new cars cannot be delivered; gas prices surged; the Russia-Ukraine kerfuffle has stymied food exports from both countries. The Bank of England cannot bring about world peace by raising interest rates!
And the covid crisis is paralysing China with very serious economic consequences
Anyway, I am off to the heart of the City of London for the first time in simply ages to give a talk on Bad People and How to Stop Them etc etc. in front of real life human beings.
It will be an odd experience after all this time doing stuff by Zoom.
Politicians are strange creatures, aren't they? Many are known for one or two things, rarely good.
Take Edwina Currie. What is she known for? Something to do with eggs and an affair with John Major.
I'm currently struggling through Stephen Fry's turgid third volume of memoirs. Fry is very much a lefty, and contributed to speeches for Kinnock, Smith and Blair. Yet he refers to Currie as 'sainted' ?
The reason: in 1994 she introduced a Private Members Bill to equalise the homosexual age of consent to the heterosexual one; it was defeated, but the age was reduced to 18 (finally being reduced to 16 around 2000).
I had no idea.
I know this wasnt the point, but three volumes of memoirs? That seems excessive.
It is. And as it was written in 2014 or so, I guess we can look forward to a fourth sometime...
Can anyone explain what Andrew Bailey is up to with the "don't take a pay rise" remarks?
It's obvious what the reaction would be and the BoE loses credibility. It's a classic prisoner's dilemma - I get the thinking, but no chance I'm following that advice myself.
Maybe putting pressure on UKGov to freeze public sector pay?
Who knows what Bailey is up to. This is the guy who hasn't even started quantitative tightening on the £800b QE assets even though inflation is raging out of control.
Inflation is raging out of control for supply side reasons: the pandemic screwed manufacturing supply lines, especially from China; chip shortages mean new cars cannot be delivered; gas prices surged; the Russia-Ukraine kerfuffle has stymied food exports from both countries. The Bank of England cannot bring about world peace by raising interest rates!
And the covid crisis is paralysing China with very serious economic consequences
Of course a lot of this is a supply side shock. But the BoE isn't helping by being asleep at the wheel. Look at the £ vs $ - clear sign that partly investors don't have faith in how HMG and BoE are managing the macroeconomics.
Note in passing that The Sun correctly refers to a quadruple and not tetralogy or tetrapak or whatever term Scouse pseuds use.
Should the punter cash out the bet for £22,000 or let it run? Current odds for the remaining two legs are: 7/1 Premier League; 8/15 Champions League.
Wouldn’t he be best off laying the 7/1 for say 280k/40k if possible?
Probably not possible and even if it was, that leaves the unlikely but possible scenario that Liverpool win the League but lose the Champions League final in which case both bets lose.
I've not heard any Liverpool fan use any word other than quadruple to discuss what happens if the 4 titles are won, but I don't think any Liverpool fan is expecting it either. It doesn't help that its not in our hands.
The census in Scotland continues to fail. 83% v 97% in England & Wales.
I don't really get why - that's a huge difference, not going to be explained by the Trans question or the splitting from the rUK one. General suspicion of SG?
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
It also diminishes the role of other nations of the USSR in the war, notably 7 million Ukranians served in the Red Army for example.
Can anyone explain what Andrew Bailey is up to with the "don't take a pay rise" remarks?
It's obvious what the reaction would be and the BoE loses credibility. It's a classic prisoner's dilemma - I get the thinking, but no chance I'm following that advice myself.
Maybe putting pressure on UKGov to freeze public sector pay?
Who knows what Bailey is up to. This is the guy who hasn't even started quantitative tightening on the £800b QE assets even though inflation is raging out of control.
Inflation is raging out of control for supply side reasons: the pandemic screwed manufacturing supply lines, especially from China; chip shortages mean new cars cannot be delivered; gas prices surged; the Russia-Ukraine kerfuffle has stymied food exports from both countries. The Bank of England cannot bring about world peace by raising interest rates!
And the covid crisis is paralysing China with very serious economic consequences
Of course a lot of this is a supply side shock. But the BoE isn't helping by being asleep at the wheel. Look at the £ vs $ - clear sign that partly investors don't have faith in how HMG and BoE are managing the macroeconomics.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the BoE and is everything to do with the appreciation of the dollar as the #1 global reserve currency that commodities are traded in. Dollar has been rising against every currency.
If you want to look at sterling you need to compare against a basket of other currencies. £ v € has been relatively stable and is at the same rate it was at Christmas.
Anyway, I am off to the heart of the City of London for the first time in simply ages to give a talk on Bad People and How to Stop Them etc etc. in front of real life human beings.
It will be an odd experience after all this time doing stuff by Zoom.
Wish me luck!
Break a leg, you'll be fine
Given the average PBer's propensity for accidents (wasn't there someone who broke both their legs just walking about?!), you shouldn't joke.
The scale of Russian crimes in Ukraine is gradually getting clearer. Bucha is not a one-off and murder, rape and torture have been used routinely by the occupying forces. It is sickening and totally evil. Normal relations with Russia can never be possible for as long as the criminals go unpunished. Meanwhile the gradual collapse of the Russian armed forces seems to being accelerated by the arrival of NATO kit and freshly trained Ukrainian troops onto the battlefields.
One can only hope that Russia is finished as a great power after a comprehensive defeat.
Then there might be a reckoning in the West with those who either took the cash to shill for Putin, or were sufficiently demented to do it for free: Tucker Carlson? Rand Paul?...
That 8/15 for CL is very skinny indeed. Is everyone confident that's a virtually 2 in 3 chance? It will be LFC's 65th game of the season against what is, at the very least, a decent side.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
There was a very good piece on this in the New Statesman last week:
Note in passing that The Sun correctly refers to a quadruple and not tetralogy or tetrapak or whatever term Scouse pseuds use.
Should the punter cash out the bet for £22,000 or let it run? Current odds for the remaining two legs are: 7/1 Premier League; 8/15 Champions League.
Wouldn’t he be best off laying the 7/1 for say 280k/40k if possible?
Probably not possible and even if it was, that leaves the unlikely but possible scenario that Liverpool win the League but lose the Champions League final in which case both bets lose.
I've not heard any Liverpool fan use any word other than quadruple to discuss what happens if the 4 titles are won, but I don't think any Liverpool fan is expecting it either. It doesn't help that its not in our hands.
If that happened, he could lay some of the 87k left from the 367k at 8/15 on the Champions League and still clear over 50k either way.
He'd presumably have to find a bridging loan for the the 280k payout on Liverpool winning the league though!
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
It also diminishes the role of other nations of the USSR in the war, notably 7 million Ukranians served in the Red Army for example.
The Russians do not see Ukrainians as being from a different nation. That is part of the problem.
Anyway, I am off to the heart of the City of London for the first time in simply ages to give a talk on Bad People and How to Stop Them etc etc. in front of real life human beings.
It will be an odd experience after all this time doing stuff by Zoom.
Wish me luck!
Break a leg, you'll be fine
Given the average PBer's propensity for accidents (wasn't there someone who broke both their legs just walking about?!), you shouldn't joke.
For all the recriminations over Boris and his agreement to the NIP, the reality is that a compromise is needed and ultimately will happen
As much as many wish Brexit had not happened, it has and there is no appetite to rejoin within the majority of the political opinion, but in time a more consensual attitude will happen, not least as a result of the war in Ukraine seeking close cooperation on defence, security and of course trade
Climbdown back into holding pattern on the Northern Ireland Protocol, from a government evidently quite stuck on what to do. Can't successfully negotiate with the EU for fear of backbenchers / DUP, can't really threaten for fear of the consequences. Government without power. https://twitter.com/BBCBreakfast/status/1526440124426473472
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
It's one of the most irritating features of military history, this tendency to assume that one's own people won the war, whereas one's allies were of little importance. It's even worse in histories of the Napoleonic wars than it is in histories of WWII.
The Indian contribution is overlooked, not least because some Indian nationalists are ashamed of it, preferring to focus on the INA, who only attracted a fraction of the people who volunteered for the Indian army.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together. Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together.
Max Hastings, who should know better, was very disparaging of the Chinese, in Nemesis, before casually revealing that the Japanese took over a million casualties fighting them. An unskilful army that simply remains in being, and ties down forces that could be more usefully deployed elsewhere, is performing a useful contribution in war.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together. Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
I think I'm repeating myself, but I recently watched a video about the history of WW1. It's amazing how much of the war was fought away from the trenches in Flanders or Gallipoli; fighting that is mostly forgotten by us. The same's true for WW2: it truly was a world war.
Climbdown back into holding pattern on the Northern Ireland Protocol, from a government evidently quite stuck on what to do. Can't successfully negotiate with the EU for fear of backbenchers / DUP, can't really threaten for fear of the consequences. Government without power. https://twitter.com/BBCBreakfast/status/1526440124426473472
Various holding patterns have now been in place for at least 100 years. Brexit threatened to bring a sort of finality between an irresistible force and an immovable object. But everyone manages to keep evading finality. This will continue until there is a united Ireland; at which point no doubt a new holding pattern will form itself. Personally I blame the Vikings and Henry II.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together. Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
India of course was the pre-1947 India, too, and there are the Anzacs, and the Vietnamese, and the Filipinos, and the Africans, and Brazilians, and West Indians, and Newfoundlanders (not then part of Canada), and ...
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together.
The "Russia won the war" crowd tend to be in the "Tanks equal potatoes" group. That is, they bang on about what a small percentage of the Russian economy Lend-Lease was. But the point of it was to provide materials and equipment that Russia didn't have and couldn't get. You can't just turn potato production into tanks.
For example, the American supplied radio systems were the only reliable radios the Red Army had. The USSR was unable to make super octane aviation fuel - it was *all* supplied by the UK and USA. Machine cutting tools was another one
We are seeing today, what happens to an economy when supplies of quite small (in terms of bulk and cost) items are turned off. The machine cutting tools (the actual sharp bits) for a large country would probably fit in a large truck or 2 - a supply for *months*. Without them, Russian industry is grinding to a halt.
Anyway, I am off to the heart of the City of London for the first time in simply ages to give a talk on Bad People and How to Stop Them etc etc. in front of real life human beings.
It will be an odd experience after all this time doing stuff by Zoom.
Wish me luck!
Break a leg, you'll be fine
Given the average PBer's propensity for accidents (wasn't there someone who broke both their legs just walking about?!), you shouldn't joke.
The census in Scotland continues to fail. 83% v 97% in England & Wales.
I don't really get why - that's a huge difference, not going to be explained by the Trans question or the splitting from the rUK one. General suspicion of SG?
Local Radio Ads are basically wall to wall "Fill in the census" at the moment
He’s not so popular any more - at home - that he can piss off his major allies, especially the USA, when he might be needing *economic help* pretty shortly
On my two recent visits to Turkey - in the conservative east and on the westernized coast - what really struck me is the trend towards secularisation and the renewed reverence for Ataturk (they’ve always loved Kemal but now they appear to love him more than PBUH). These aren’t great signs for Erdogan’s brand of soft Islamification
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together.
Max Hastings, who should know better, was very disparaging of the Chinese, in Nemesis, before casually revealing that the Japanese took over a million casualties fighting them. An unskilful army that simply remains in being, and ties down forces that could be more usefully deployed elsewhere, is performing a useful contribution in war.
Whether Japanese troops could have been deployed elsewhere is another question. There was no real cooperation between Germany and Japan, so forming a second front against the Soviets was out. The Japanese lost to America in the Pacific but that was mainly down to the US Navy and its carriers, and US Marines on each island. Japan could have deployed its troops against British forces in the East where Japan had anyway been largely successful, and if that meant it would capture India or a large part of it then so what?
Rather than being deployed elsewhere, those Japanese troops would simply have captured more of China.
The census in Scotland continues to fail. 83% v 97% in England & Wales.
I don't really get why - that's a huge difference, not going to be explained by the Trans question or the splitting from the rUK one. General suspicion of SG?
Census work is surprisingly tricky, I understand. Having an organisation with a history of doing a particular census, established methods etc, is a big, big help.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together. Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
I think I'm repeating myself, but I recently watched a video about the history of WW1. It's amazing how much of the war was fought away from the trenches in Flanders or Gallipoli; fighting that is mostly forgotten by us. The same's true for WW2: it truly was a world war.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together. Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
Personal rant against the use of 'likely' as an unqualified adverb. Ugh!
(I may be becoming an old fogey, of course.)
Speaking, like, of likely, like, reminds me, like of the like most annoying and, like, just, like, wrong, like, like, article I like have, like, read even in the, like, Guardian for like ages.
Politicians are strange creatures, aren't they? Many are known for one or two things, rarely good.
Take Edwina Currie. What is she known for? Something to do with eggs and an affair with John Major.
I'm currently struggling through Stephen Fry's turgid third volume of memoirs. Fry is very much a lefty, and contributed to speeches for Kinnock, Smith and Blair. Yet he refers to Currie as 'sainted' ?
The reason: in 1994 she introduced a Private Members Bill to equalise the homosexual age of consent to the heterosexual one; it was defeated, but the age was reduced to 18 (finally being reduced to 16 around 2000).
I had no idea.
I know this wasnt the point, but three volumes of memoirs? That seems excessive.
It is. And as it was written in 2014 or so, I guess we can look forward to a fourth sometime...
The first one was brilliant. The Liar
The second - Moab is my Washpot - was a significant decline. I stopped there.
What kind of berk writes FOUR volumes of memoirs. No one has THAT much material
Personal rant against the use of 'likely' as an unqualified adverb. Ugh!
(I may be becoming an old fogey, of course.)
Speaking, like, of likely, like, reminds me, like of the like most annoying and, like, just, like, wrong, like, like, article I like have, like, read even in the, like, Guardian for like ages.
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together. Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
And that war started in 1937.
Yes. Don't ever suggest WW2 began in 1939 there. Whilst I take the point about deployment, one dreads to think what could have happened had they simply surrendered.
Climbdown back into holding pattern on the Northern Ireland Protocol, from a government evidently quite stuck on what to do. Can't successfully negotiate with the EU for fear of backbenchers / DUP, can't really threaten for fear of the consequences. Government without power. https://twitter.com/BBCBreakfast/status/1526440124426473472
Various holding patterns have now been in place for at least 100 years. Brexit threatened to bring a sort of finality between an irresistible force and an immovable object. But everyone manages to keep evading finality. This will continue until there is a united Ireland; at which point no doubt a new holding pattern will form itself. Personally I blame the Vikings and Henry II.
There will never be a united Ireland, at most the Catholic majority areas will join the Republic but Antrim and East Londonderry and Lagan Valley and the Protestant and Unionist dominated areas will stay in the UK.
The census in Scotland continues to fail. 83% v 97% in England & Wales.
I don't really get why - that's a huge difference, not going to be explained by the Trans question or the splitting from the rUK one. General suspicion of SG?
Census work is surprisingly tricky, I understand. Having an organisation with a history of doing a particular census, established methods etc, is a big, big help.
Have they provided sufficient information about it in Lallans, Gaelic, Old Norse, Doric and Glaswegeian? The website seems to be written predominantly in London style English.
Politicians are strange creatures, aren't they? Many are known for one or two things, rarely good.
Take Edwina Currie. What is she known for? Something to do with eggs and an affair with John Major.
I'm currently struggling through Stephen Fry's turgid third volume of memoirs. Fry is very much a lefty, and contributed to speeches for Kinnock, Smith and Blair. Yet he refers to Currie as 'sainted' ?
The reason: in 1994 she introduced a Private Members Bill to equalise the homosexual age of consent to the heterosexual one; it was defeated, but the age was reduced to 18 (finally being reduced to 16 around 2000).
I had no idea.
I know this wasnt the point, but three volumes of memoirs? That seems excessive.
It is. And as it was written in 2014 or so, I guess we can look forward to a fourth sometime...
The first one was brilliant. The Liar
The second - Moab is my Washpot - was a significant decline. I stopped there.
What kind of berk writes FOUR volumes of memoirs. No one has THAT much material
Don't The Liar and Moab cover pretty much the same ground, one as a Not My Memoirs Honest novelisation, and the other as a straight autobiography?
Though three volumes, even for someone with an interesting life, is an awful lot.
(Can't knock the Fry, though. I used to devour his writings, along with Clive James, when I was a precious provincial teen without a proper outlet for it.)
The scale of Russian crimes in Ukraine is gradually getting clearer. Bucha is not a one-off and murder, rape and torture have been used routinely by the occupying forces. It is sickening and totally evil. Normal relations with Russia can never be possible for as long as the criminals go unpunished. Meanwhile the gradual collapse of the Russian armed forces seems to being accelerated by the arrival of NATO kit and freshly trained Ukrainian troops onto the battlefields.
One can only hope that Russia is finished as a great power after a comprehensive defeat.
Then there might be a reckoning in the West with those who either took the cash to shill for Putin, or were sufficiently demented to do it for free: Tucker Carlson? Rand Paul? As for those like Farage and Salmond who were happy to work for RT, to my mind there is insufficient condemnation of them both then and now. The truth is that a Russian defeat should also be followed by a righteous purge of those in the West who were so morally blind that they were prepared to support the blank faced butcher of the Kremlin or those who took his money. Schoeder, Le Pen et al in the EU, and several figures in the UK.
A monstrous evil has been unleashed, and there really is no morally neutral ground. Those who stood to gain should pay the price.
Not just those who were Russian cheerleaders.
We should get learn from the experience to expose those who have been Chinese cheerleaders as well.
Here is @BrandonLewis repeating the false claim "there are more people in work now than before the pandemic" for which the PM has been fact-checked eight times and reprimanded by the govt's own statistical authority - here:
It would be incredible if ordinary Russians weren’t beginning to have doubts
They were promised a brief, successful “Military Operation”, but the scale of the losses, the prolonged and intense fighting, the nervous look of the leadership, are all telling them that this is going to be an enduring and horrible war, which they could actually lose. And for what? And all of this against their cousins the Ukrainians?!
They can also see their exclusion from world affairs - from sports to Eurovision - and the departure of western companies. And apparently 2m young able Russians have fled the country
I do not believe the Russian state propaganda machine is so good it can make up for all this. Indeed there are signs they have stopped trying
The last minute or so is the anchor, Olga Skabeyeva, with her mad and rather chilling summary - "We were forced into this. We cannot surrender. We cannot talk to anyone. We must fight until the end. We will get there; our great country will win"
Part of the problem seems to be that Russians conflate prior USSR successes with Russian ones
And also overplay their role.
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts: *) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side. *) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
Chinese are forgotten too. There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together. Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
I think I'm repeating myself, but I recently watched a video about the history of WW1. It's amazing how much of the war was fought away from the trenches in Flanders or Gallipoli; fighting that is mostly forgotten by us. The same's true for WW2: it truly was a world war.
Note in passing that The Sun correctly refers to a quadruple and not tetralogy or tetrapak or whatever term Scouse pseuds use.
Should the punter cash out the bet for £22,000 or let it run? Current odds for the remaining two legs are: 7/1 Premier League; 8/15 Champions League.
Bet as much as they can afford on City and Real as a hedge?.
Perhaps, although asking for a partial cash-out might be an easier equivalent. Say, take £11,000 now and let the other half run to win £183,600 if Liverpool do pull it off.
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Politicians are strange creatures, aren't they? Many are known for one or two things, rarely good.
Take Edwina Currie. What is she known for? Something to do with eggs and an affair with John Major.
I'm currently struggling through Stephen Fry's turgid third volume of memoirs. Fry is very much a lefty, and contributed to speeches for Kinnock, Smith and Blair. Yet he refers to Currie as 'sainted' ?
The reason: in 1994 she introduced a Private Members Bill to equalise the homosexual age of consent to the heterosexual one; it was defeated, but the age was reduced to 18 (finally being reduced to 16 around 2000).
I had no idea.
I know this wasnt the point, but three volumes of memoirs? That seems excessive.
It is. And as it was written in 2014 or so, I guess we can look forward to a fourth sometime...
The first one was brilliant. The Liar
The second - Moab is my Washpot - was a significant decline. I stopped there.
What kind of berk writes FOUR volumes of memoirs. No one has THAT much material
Don't The Liar and Moab cover pretty much the same ground, one as a Not My Memoirs Honest novelisation, and the other as a straight autobiography?
Though three volumes, even for someone with an interesting life, is an awful lot.
(Can't knock the Fry, though. I used to devour his writings, along with Clive James, when I was a precious provincial teen without a proper outlet for it.)
Yes, you’re right. I slightly misremember
Anyway the Liar was obviously memoir, badly disguised as a novel, and it was excellent and witty, and he should have stopped there, for a long time
And maybe given us one more volume of his later life right at the end
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Apparently some hospitality sectors in the USA - this is a worldwide problem - have had to triple or even quadruple wages to get the staff. This is in many ways a good thing, workers in US hospitality were paid horrible wages and expected to make up for it in tipping. Which is a peculiar custom that descends all the way from slavery: slaves emancipated by Lincoln went north and took hospitality jobs (the easiest for the young and rootless, as now) and their employers decided they could do without “white wages” and it went from there
So: good riddance. However this means that American hotel prices have gone through the roof. Double, triple, more. Advice: don’t go on holiday in the USA for a year or two
Politicians are strange creatures, aren't they? Many are known for one or two things, rarely good.
Take Edwina Currie. What is she known for? Something to do with eggs and an affair with John Major.
I'm currently struggling through Stephen Fry's turgid third volume of memoirs. Fry is very much a lefty, and contributed to speeches for Kinnock, Smith and Blair. Yet he refers to Currie as 'sainted' ?
The reason: in 1994 she introduced a Private Members Bill to equalise the homosexual age of consent to the heterosexual one; it was defeated, but the age was reduced to 18 (finally being reduced to 16 around 2000).
I had no idea.
I know this wasnt the point, but three volumes of memoirs? That seems excessive.
It is. And as it was written in 2014 or so, I guess we can look forward to a fourth sometime...
The first one was brilliant. The Liar
The second - Moab is my Washpot - was a significant decline. I stopped there.
What kind of berk writes FOUR volumes of memoirs. No one has THAT much material
Don't The Liar and Moab cover pretty much the same ground, one as a Not My Memoirs Honest novelisation, and the other as a straight autobiography?
Though three volumes, even for someone with an interesting life, is an awful lot.
(Can't knock the Fry, though. I used to devour his writings, along with Clive James, when I was a precious provincial teen without a proper outlet for it.)
Yes, you’re right. I slightly misremember
Anyway the Liar was obviously memoir, badly disguised as a novel, and it was excellent and witty, and he should have stopped there, for a long time
And maybe given us one more volume of his later life right at the end
Never mind Stephen Fry's life. He should instead write a biography of erstwhile comedy partner Hugh Laurie, who became a Hollywood A-lister while Fry was reduced to panel shows.
ETA and their early collaborator Emma Thompson racked up BAFTAs and Oscars.
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Maybe it's just because I've moved so am noticing. But I'm struck by the sheer number of places to eat round here. Not restaurants, but chippies, pie shops, sandwich shops, kebab places, etc.. None of them are busy at any time. Can't see how the local economy ever supported them all in the first place. And can't see how many will survive for long at this rate.
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
The vast majority of such jobs, outside the central London were (and are) filled by UK citizens.
Job mobility is an fascinating area - I've long believed that the lowest paid are the least mobile. Whether this is a sensible caution, lack of horizons or an artefact of lower educational achievement is another question. But COVID forced a lot of poorly paid people to try other things. Which they are now sticking to, it seems.
Politicians are strange creatures, aren't they? Many are known for one or two things, rarely good.
Take Edwina Currie. What is she known for? Something to do with eggs and an affair with John Major.
I'm currently struggling through Stephen Fry's turgid third volume of memoirs. Fry is very much a lefty, and contributed to speeches for Kinnock, Smith and Blair. Yet he refers to Currie as 'sainted' ?
The reason: in 1994 she introduced a Private Members Bill to equalise the homosexual age of consent to the heterosexual one; it was defeated, but the age was reduced to 18 (finally being reduced to 16 around 2000).
I had no idea.
I know this wasnt the point, but three volumes of memoirs? That seems excessive.
It is. And as it was written in 2014 or so, I guess we can look forward to a fourth sometime...
The first one was brilliant. The Liar
The second - Moab is my Washpot - was a significant decline. I stopped there.
What kind of berk writes FOUR volumes of memoirs. No one has THAT much material
Don't The Liar and Moab cover pretty much the same ground, one as a Not My Memoirs Honest novelisation, and the other as a straight autobiography?
Though three volumes, even for someone with an interesting life, is an awful lot.
(Can't knock the Fry, though. I used to devour his writings, along with Clive James, when I was a precious provincial teen without a proper outlet for it.)
Yes, you’re right. I slightly misremember
Anyway the Liar was obviously memoir, badly disguised as a novel, and it was excellent and witty, and he should have stopped there, for a long time
And maybe given us one more volume of his later life right at the end
Never mind Stephen Fry's life. He should instead write a biography of erstwhile comedy partner Hugh Laurie, who became a Hollywood A-lister while Fry was reduced to panel shows.
Fry has had such an incredible, varied career I doubt he is agonised by Laurie’s success the way Peter Cook was, supposedly, pained by the Hollywood rise of Dudley Moore
Anyway I am sitting in a Greek terrace in the dreaming peaks and breakfast is done and the sun doth shine and I must attempt some work before my next walk through the Eden of the North Pindus mountains. Later!
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Maybe it's just because I've moved so am noticing. But I'm struck by the sheer number of places to eat round here. Not restaurants, but chippies, pie shops, sandwich shops, kebab places, etc.. None of them are busy at any time. Can't see how the local economy ever supported them all in the first place. And can't see how many will survive for long at this rate.
How so many grotty takeaways and 8-to-late convenience stores exist is a mystery to everyone I know.
Its generally assumed that some of them are a front for more dubious activities.
Politicians are strange creatures, aren't they? Many are known for one or two things, rarely good.
Take Edwina Currie. What is she known for? Something to do with eggs and an affair with John Major.
I'm currently struggling through Stephen Fry's turgid third volume of memoirs. Fry is very much a lefty, and contributed to speeches for Kinnock, Smith and Blair. Yet he refers to Currie as 'sainted' ?
The reason: in 1994 she introduced a Private Members Bill to equalise the homosexual age of consent to the heterosexual one; it was defeated, but the age was reduced to 18 (finally being reduced to 16 around 2000).
I had no idea.
I know this wasnt the point, but three volumes of memoirs? That seems excessive.
It is. And as it was written in 2014 or so, I guess we can look forward to a fourth sometime...
The first one was brilliant. The Liar
The second - Moab is my Washpot - was a significant decline. I stopped there.
What kind of berk writes FOUR volumes of memoirs. No one has THAT much material
Don't The Liar and Moab cover pretty much the same ground, one as a Not My Memoirs Honest novelisation, and the other as a straight autobiography?
Though three volumes, even for someone with an interesting life, is an awful lot.
(Can't knock the Fry, though. I used to devour his writings, along with Clive James, when I was a precious provincial teen without a proper outlet for it.)
Yes, you’re right. I slightly misremember
Anyway the Liar was obviously memoir, badly disguised as a novel, and it was excellent and witty, and he should have stopped there, for a long time
And maybe given us one more volume of his later life right at the end
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Maybe it's just because I've moved so am noticing. But I'm struck by the sheer number of places to eat round here. Not restaurants, but chippies, pie shops, sandwich shops, kebab places, etc.. None of them are busy at any time. Can't see how the local economy ever supported them all in the first place. And can't see how many will survive for long at this rate.
How so many grotty takeaways and 8-to-late convenience stores exist is a mystery to everyone I know.
Its generally assumed that some of them are a front for more dubious activities.
Yes. We've just had 3 closed down for that very reason. However. There can't be a market for that many places to deliver drugs either, can there?
Personal rant against the use of 'likely' as an unqualified adverb. Ugh!
(I may be becoming an old fogey, of course.)
Kicking against the pricks there Ben.
“Likely” is an Americanism and I like it. And use it. A nice alternative to “probably”
Not all Americanisms are bad or ugly or pointless. Plenty are excellent and useful
A point of agreement. UK English is centuries of borrowings of one kind or another. Why complain now ?
Precisely
It is exactly this which makes English the greatest language yet devised. It absorbs everything, borrows all over the place, and marches on
These last few weeks abroad again bring home how much English has become the lingua franca. It is now assumed by everyone that you must speak English abroad. Thais in Turkey. French in Samos. The Germans, Japanese, Dutch, Brazilians, here in the Zagori mountains. They all speak English FIRST and all the young Greeks and Turks can speak it back to them, in return
We are incredibly lucky that it is our mother tongue, tho it maybe makes us lazy
Am I the only one who wishes they’d just get on with it and reunify Ireland so we can be free of endless retweets from Scott about the Northern Ireland Protocol and unflinching unionist posts from HYFUD?
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Maybe it's just because I've moved so am noticing. But I'm struck by the sheer number of places to eat round here. Not restaurants, but chippies, pie shops, sandwich shops, kebab places, etc.. None of them are busy at any time. Can't see how the local economy ever supported them all in the first place. And can't see how many will survive for long at this rate.
Indeed. One important reason for the shortage of staff is the increased number of restaurants and takeaways. Another is the huge rise in delivery jobs. And it was noticeable that when Amazon expanded last year, its job adverts explicitly stated they required no experience.
Am I the only one who wishes they’d just get on with it and reunify Ireland so we can be free of endless retweets from Scott about the Northern Ireland Protocol and unflinching unionist posts from HYFUD?
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Maybe it's just because I've moved so am noticing. But I'm struck by the sheer number of places to eat round here. Not restaurants, but chippies, pie shops, sandwich shops, kebab places, etc.. None of them are busy at any time. Can't see how the local economy ever supported them all in the first place. And can't see how many will survive for long at this rate.
How so many grotty takeaways and 8-to-late convenience stores exist is a mystery to everyone I know.
Its generally assumed that some of them are a front for more dubious activities.
Yes. We've just had 3 closed down for that very reason. However. There can't be a market for that many places to deliver drugs either, can there?
Walter White didn’t sell drugs from his car wash but to launder the money
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Maybe it's just because I've moved so am noticing. But I'm struck by the sheer number of places to eat round here. Not restaurants, but chippies, pie shops, sandwich shops, kebab places, etc.. None of them are busy at any time. Can't see how the local economy ever supported them all in the first place. And can't see how many will survive for long at this rate.
How so many grotty takeaways and 8-to-late convenience stores exist is a mystery to everyone I know.
Its generally assumed that some of them are a front for more dubious activities.
Yes. We've just had 3 closed down for that very reason. However. There can't be a market for that many places to deliver drugs either, can there?
Walter White didn’t sell drugs from his car wash but to launder the money
Fair enough. There's some heavy duty laundering going on round here, then.
Far be it from me to be the first to state the obvious... But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Thing is, hospitality jobs make most sense for people who are fairly young, without responsibilities, for whom being in a nice place for a summer, or coming to England to improve their English, is part of the package. There isn't enough value added by them to create a job to support a family, unless you want to raise prices to an unviable level.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
The vast majority of such jobs, outside the central London were (and are) filled by UK citizens.
Job mobility is an fascinating area - I've long believed that the lowest paid are the least mobile. Whether this is a sensible caution, lack of horizons or an artefact of lower educational achievement is another question. But COVID forced a lot of poorly paid people to try other things. Which they are now sticking to, it seems.
Least mobile in terms of relocating but suddenly we have lots of brand new jobs related to online shopping that need little skill, no experience and no relocation.
Am I the only one who wishes they’d just get on with it and reunify Ireland so we can be free of endless retweets from Scott about the Northern Ireland Protocol and unflinching unionist posts from HYFUD?
That won't solve the increasing threats of violence from loyalists, the Troubles would return just mainly from the loyalist side rather than the nationalist side as was the case in the last century.
Removing the Irish Sea border is the best way to return stability
Comments
I listened to an interview with David Dimbleby yesterday, where he basically said that the Russians won the war, and that our contribution was minor. It was bullsh*t. Yes, the Russians fought their way into Germany. Yes, the Russians kept a million or more German troops occupied.
But it ignores two facts:
*) For two years, Russia was on Germany's side.
*) The massive amount of financial and material aid the US (and us, to a lesser extent) gave Russia. The US alone gave 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 planes, millions of tons of fuel, millions of tons of food, and everything else an army requires. Without this, Russia would have been defeated.
Whilst we tend to overplay our role, we at least generally acknowledge the Yanks, Canadians, Russians, Poles et al who fought alongside us (*). The Second World War was won by a collaboration, with each major power giving what they could. Without any of them, the war could have ended very differently.
The Russians see it as 'their' victory, apparently with the roles of other countries whitewashed. Whilst we also suffer from this, there does not appear to be quite the same mythos over it.
(*) Not Indians though, sadly. Their contribution to the war effort is often forgotten.
On the latter though, the EU have had no need or reason to seek to enforce the Protocol so dogmatically and to do so is completely counterproductive and not in keeping with the Good Friday Agreement. They're putting the "integrity" of their market ahead of peace in Northern Ireland or the GFA they claimed they wanted to protect.
Had the same Protocol been implemented with sensitivity and care and genuine risk assessments it would have been much better.
Thankfully though the Protocol came with Safeguards and they should be exercised. It is well past time to invoke Article 16 and use it to legally suspend the Protocol's implementation until all parties (including the DUP) are satisfied with a deal going forwards.
I'd love Stevie G and Coutinho to have an incredible late opportunity to help win the League for Liverpool, but that's fairytale stuff I can't see it actually happening.
I've not heard any Liverpool fan use any word other than quadruple to discuss what happens if the 4 titles are won, but I don't think any Liverpool fan is expecting it either. It doesn't help that its not in our hands.
I don't really get why - that's a huge difference, not going to be explained by the Trans question or the splitting from the rUK one. General suspicion of SG?
'Did Boris Johnson not understand what he was signing or was he lying?' #Ridge
https://twitter.com/RidgeOnSunday/status/1525779212430462976/video/1
Those real pay figures are stark. Not sure what levers can be pulled right now effectively.
We are headed for recession I reckon.
If you want to look at sterling you need to compare against a basket of other currencies. £ v € has been relatively stable and is at the same rate it was at Christmas.
Still are.
Is everyone confident that's a virtually 2 in 3 chance?
It will be LFC's 65th game of the season against what is, at the very least, a decent side.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/top-tories-are-quietly-making-moves-on-leadership-bid-despite-boris-johnson-seeming-safe-for-now
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2022/05/how-the-worlds-dictators-are-rewriting-the-past-in-order-to-control-the-future
The control of history is an essential element of the dictator's toolkit.
He'd presumably have to find a bridging loan for the the 280k payout on Liverpool winning the league though!
As much as many wish Brexit had not happened, it has and there is no appetite to rejoin within the majority of the political opinion, but in time a more consensual attitude will happen, not least as a result of the war in Ukraine seeking close cooperation on defence, security and of course trade
The Indian contribution is overlooked, not least because some Indian nationalists are ashamed of it, preferring to focus on the INA, who only attracted a fraction of the people who volunteered for the Indian army.
There were more Japanese troops tied down there, 4 million I think, than in the rest of the Pacific put together.
Getting the worst end of brutality as well.
(I may be becoming an old fogey, of course.)
https://twitter.com/rafaelbehr/status/1526463593411227650
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/i-look-at-my-government-differently-losses-in-ukraine-test-russians-faith
For example, the American supplied radio systems were the only reliable radios the Red Army had. The USSR was unable to make super octane aviation fuel - it was *all* supplied by the UK and USA. Machine cutting tools was another one
We are seeing today, what happens to an economy when supplies of quite small (in terms of bulk and cost) items are turned off. The machine cutting tools (the actual sharp bits) for a large country would probably fit in a large truck or 2 - a supply for *months*. Without them, Russian industry is grinding to a halt.
The Turkish inflation rate in April was an astonishing 70%
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/5/turkeys-inflation-rate-soars-to-almost-70-percent-in-april
He’s not so popular any more - at home - that he can piss off his major allies, especially the USA, when he might be needing *economic help* pretty shortly
On my two recent visits to Turkey - in the conservative east and on the westernized coast - what really struck me is the trend towards secularisation and the renewed reverence for Ataturk (they’ve always loved Kemal but now they appear to love him more than PBUH). These aren’t great signs for Erdogan’s brand of soft Islamification
Rather than being deployed elsewhere, those Japanese troops would simply have captured more of China.
https://news.sky.com/story/minister-says-people-should-work-more-hours-or-move-to-a-better-job-to-protect-themselves-from-cost-of-living-surge-12614360
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/may/15/why-do-people-like-say-like-so-much-in-praise-of-an-underappreciated-word
The first one was brilliant. The Liar
The second - Moab is my Washpot - was a significant decline. I stopped there.
What kind of berk writes FOUR volumes of memoirs. No one has THAT much material
But, erm. Isn't that why employers are having huge trouble filling minimum wage positions?
Don't ever suggest WW2 began in 1939 there.
Whilst I take the point about deployment, one dreads to think what could have happened had they simply surrendered.
Not all Americanisms are bad or ugly or pointless. Plenty are excellent and useful
For all the economic bewailing many millions of people are doing very well.
** On a national level at least - it would be interesting to see data at a local level and for different employment sectors.
Though three volumes, even for someone with an interesting life, is an awful lot.
(Can't knock the Fry, though. I used to devour his writings, along with Clive James, when I was a precious provincial teen without a proper outlet for it.)
We should get learn from the experience to expose those who have been Chinese cheerleaders as well.
It's 14th Century.
I hate it btw
"I've gone and putten putten whereas tha'd 'ave putten put"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/24/boris-johnson-again-reprimanded-after-misleading-employment-claim https://twitter.com/KayBurley/status/1526458436816347140
https://twitter.com/Platinum2022/status/1526293673725534209?s=20&t=HIy-A7fbc2io38zyvJzYLQ
They were promised a brief, successful “Military Operation”, but the scale of the losses, the prolonged and intense fighting, the nervous look of the leadership, are all telling them that this is going to be an enduring and horrible war, which they could actually lose. And for what? And all of this against their cousins the Ukrainians?!
They can also see their exclusion from world affairs - from sports to Eurovision - and the departure of western companies. And apparently 2m young able Russians have fled the country
I do not believe the Russian state propaganda machine is so good it can make up for all this. Indeed there are signs they have stopped trying
http://www.100letprve.si/en/world_war_1/casualties/index.html
The Russian civil war which followed saw 8 million dead.
The economy will rebalance... Quite possibly with less jobs. But that could be with fewer businesses rather than productivity by mechanisation.
Anyway the Liar was obviously memoir, badly disguised as a novel, and it was excellent and witty, and he should have stopped there, for a long time
And maybe given us one more volume of his later life right at the end
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/may/17/counties-receive-fresh-batch-after-dukes-balls-go-soft-cricket
I find it ugly but there is no English word that does the same job.
So: good riddance. However this means that American hotel prices have gone through the roof. Double, triple, more. Advice: don’t go on holiday in the USA for a year or two
https://twitter.com/castlvillageman/status/1526167783662288896?s=21&t=LQmwld4xKbKL-G1PoF2Vrw
ETA and their early collaborator Emma Thompson racked up BAFTAs and Oscars.
And I’m note sure it is ugly. It has a whimsical quality which balances its vulgar boasting. I am therefore drawn to it for some unaccountable reason
Anyone else had their email hacked, the basis seeming to come from this site?
But I'm struck by the sheer number of places to eat round here. Not restaurants, but chippies, pie shops, sandwich shops, kebab places, etc..
None of them are busy at any time. Can't see how the local economy ever supported them all in the first place.
And can't see how many will survive for long at this rate.
Job mobility is an fascinating area - I've long believed that the lowest paid are the least mobile. Whether this is a sensible caution, lack of horizons or an artefact of lower educational achievement is another question. But COVID forced a lot of poorly paid people to try other things. Which they are now sticking to, it seems.
Haven't seen any 'there will be no strawberries in the supermarkets' stories though.
Anyway I am sitting in a Greek terrace in the dreaming peaks and breakfast is done and the sun doth shine and I must attempt some work before my next walk through the Eden of the North Pindus mountains. Later!
UK English is centuries of borrowings of one kind or another. Why complain now ?
Its generally assumed that some of them are a front for more dubious activities.
We've just had 3 closed down for that very reason.
However. There can't be a market for that many places to deliver drugs either, can there?
It is exactly this which makes English the greatest language yet devised. It absorbs everything, borrows all over the place, and marches on
These last few weeks abroad again bring home how much English has become the lingua franca. It is now assumed by everyone that you must speak English abroad. Thais in Turkey. French in Samos. The Germans, Japanese, Dutch, Brazilians, here in the Zagori mountains. They all speak English FIRST and all the young Greeks and Turks can speak it back to them, in return
We are incredibly lucky that it is our mother tongue, tho it maybe makes us lazy
And that really is it. To work, to work
There's some heavy duty laundering going on round here, then.
Removing the Irish Sea border is the best way to return stability
https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/uvf-is-actively-planning-to-target-more-irish-politicians-41492302.html