This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
Having sex with one’s postdoc, i.e. one staff member in a relationship with another, wouldn’t get you fired. A line manager in a relationship with whom they line manage raises HR concerns, but is not forbidden. One would, I presume, be expected to report the relationship up the chain of command and arrange new line management arrangements. A relationship with one’s student is a different matter.
In Sabatini’s case… well, he’s in a different country with different attitudes to employment law. It’s much easier to sack people in the US. The article is clearly written from a pro-Sabatini position. What is alleged about Sabatini was more than that he had a relationship with a junior staff member. darkage’s initial summary of the article was incomplete.
Well nothing will happen with NIP until next year and chances are she won't even be Speaker after November, so...
As the tweet and responses point out, there is bipartisan opposition to any trade deal with the UK if it continues along its course.
But we know we aren’t getting a trade deal with the US anyway. So that’s a useful non-threat they can happily make and we can ignore.
That’s fine but it was a key part of the Brexit economic case, such as it was.
The ability to make deals was a key part of the Brexit economic case, not making a deal explicitly and solely with the USA.
Since we already have some deals and talks are quite advanced already on the CPTPP which would trump them all, that's a key part that is still going strong.
Its worth remembering that if Britain joins the CPTPP then that would be a bigger trade zone than the European Union - as well as a faster growing one.
What's the growth rate of CPTPP counries?
Fast but (even speaking as a Brexit supporter glad of his vote) not as relevant because of distance. It’s really useful, but not a complete game changer. We will still always want to trade some things closer to home.
I was also interested in the baseline.
Every time I get paid my bank balance's "growth" for that day is faster than Jeff Bezos's growth rate. But only an idiot would think I was catching him up.
The dirty secret about economic growth is that it's easier to achieve when you're poorer because of the slipstream effect. Hitching your wagon to growing markets makes a lot of superficial sense, but by the time the market has grown to be comparable to what's on your doorstep, isn't it going to be levelling off to a more "Western" growth rate?
The problem is that the EU is poorer too and isn't growing.
Since 1992 when the EU replaced the EEC, the EU has been growing slower than most of the rest of the developed world and is falling backwards not going forwards.
GDP per capita in the Republic of Korea is not just growing faster by far than GDP per capita in the Eurozone, but its been catching up and will probably overtake either this year or in the next couple of years.
As for your comment about South Korea, why are you suddenly cherry picking a country that's outside both the EU and CPTPP? Don't do a HYUFD on me, you are way better than that.
The EU absolutely is "poorer". In the 1980s despite being a lot smaller then prior to multiple expansions it was in a famous speech by Margaret Thatcher a trade zone "bigger than the United States". Its not anymore though, despite the fact the EU has expanded repeatedly and the USA hasn't yet added a new State a lot smaller than the USA. Indeed it had already fallen a long way behind before we left too.
US GDP per capita $63k Euro Area GDP per capita $35k
As for why I gave the example of Korea, the conversation expanded from CPTPP to Asia in general, and whether nations there are growing just due to the "slipstream" effect so I used them as an example, because they're coincidentally at the crossover point. Their GDP per capita is $34k versus $35k in the Euro Area, so if there were just a "slipstream" effect then that should be clearly visible by now and their growth should have halted over the past decade, but it hasn't.
Oh and Korea has followed the UK in announcing it is seeking accession to the CPTPP.
The EU is relatively poorer. It is a large developed country, with a low population growth rate. (The same, of course, can be said of Japan.)
It (and Japan) has still got absolutely richer in the last few decades - just less quickly than younger or poorer countries.
That said, I suspect South Korea (and Taiwan) have now reached levels where their economic growth is going to slow sharply. Demographic headwinds mean that they will need to spend ever increasing portions of their earnings in looking after old people. They - basically - are the next Japan or Italy.
That's an interesting thought, someone mentioned earlier their distaste at seeing old people working in the USA, but could the fact that people do continue working much more over there be a factor in why American growth has so vastly exceeded European growth in the past few decades?
They have a much higher birthrate and much higher immigration too.
What is interesting is that Germany was higher in 1992 than the USA, although the two had often been around the same level.
That isn't the case anymore. As I said since the EU came into existence in 1992, the EU has been falling further and further behind.
Oh and I checked @Farooq 's data where he said the EU had grown an average of 2% since 1980. That average is accurate, but the EU didn't exist for the period 1980-1992.
Actually the EEC grew in the period 1980 to 1991 by well over 2% but since 1992 well under 2% has been achieved, and since the turn of the century its more like 1.5% (even excluding 2020 due to the pandemic).
The EU has not succeeded in any measurable metric. People should be asking themselves why the EU is failing, not why we are leaving it.
That number swings around a lot with currencies, though. If you look at EUR-USD, it's been as low as 0.8, and as high as 1.3 (maybe more).
Much of the recent outperformance has been currency related, and you can see that by overlaying the UK on there:
Basically, if the USD is strong, the US powers ahead. If it is weak, everyone else catches up.
Ah, but look at the UK graph in your link and see how it follows America's upward trend until the GFC drop but never recovers under Conservative rule. Our steepest upward curves seem to have been under Labour governments, even in the 1970s.
Does PB think the high inflation will burn itself out (as much of it is from the raised price of wheat, oil etc from Ukraine's supply being throttled)?
We must hope but as well as Ukraine bear in mind sanctions against Russia which is, in normal times, a major exporter of hard and soft commodities, and China's Covid-related shutdowns.
OT my pension statement landed on the doormat yesterday. In the past year, my pot's value has dropped 10 per cent as share prices have fallen, and thanks to inflation, what remains has less purchasing power. This is bad news considering I have no income since being made redundant, and am burning my way through savings.
Not good; at least one of my pensions is pretty well unchanged this year. Fortunately the NHS and State ones have risen a little. And one way and another we're not driving as much, so that's a saving.
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
Knouse wasn’t Sabatini’s student. She was a colleague - the head of another lab - who didn’t work with him directly
This is an interesting read. A scientist who has been destroyed by having a consensual sexual relationship, which was not reported to his employer. Was then consequently "Weinstin'ed out of science".
People want to believe these things are more complicated than they seem. That may well be true. But to my mind this is not progress at all - It as a tribal witch hunt, with revolutionary justice being dispatched through kangaroo courts - all masquerading as due process.
If the Republicans can sort themselves out, they will win in 2024.
Actually, the Sabatini story sounds rather complicated. The article presents only one side of the story (Sabatini's).
I am not sure I would draw any conclusions from the article.
Having sex with your postdoc/grad student will get you fired from your job at most Universities. That has been the case for at least a decade.
(Of course, things were different in the past. Otherwise, we would never have heard of Schrodinger or Feynman.)
Having sex with one’s postdoc, i.e. one staff member in a relationship with another, wouldn’t get you fired. A line manager in a relationship with whom they line manage raises HR concerns, but is not forbidden. One would, I presume, be expected to report the relationship up the chain of command and arrange new line management arrangements. A relationship with one’s student is a different matter.
Does PB think the high inflation will burn itself out (as much of it is from the raised price of wheat, oil etc from Ukraine's supply being throttled)?
I don't have a robust understanding of macroeconomics, but this an unusual situation where a big chunk of the population saved lots of money during the pandemic as there were no opportunities for discretionary spending.
So, despite prices increasing dramatically, people who saved a lot are still going out for dinner, driving at the weekends and so on, and pushing prices even higher. This completely fucks those who didn't have the cash to save in the first place.
Given the BoE is not raising interest rates to dampen this all down, it's up to Sunak to come after those of us who saved loads during the pandemic and transfer it to those getting screwed.
Comments
And one way and another we're not driving as much, so that's a saving.
So, despite prices increasing dramatically, people who saved a lot are still going out for dinner, driving at the weekends and so on, and pushing prices even higher. This completely fucks those who didn't have the cash to save in the first place.
Given the BoE is not raising interest rates to dampen this all down, it's up to Sunak to come after those of us who saved loads during the pandemic and transfer it to those getting screwed.