If there is a by-election, is there a man in the white suit option?
Michael Fabricant in the neighbouring constituency should be in a straitjacket.
Oh, sorry, is that not what you meant?
Fabricant is an enigma, a barometer for a broken parliamentary system.
How he became.and remains and MP is a mystery. You would have thought someone along the way, be they a Tory selector or a voter would have said hang on, this is not necessarily the best person to represent us.
(There are others like this, but he stands out as a big Why?)
Only voters can sort these things.
But they don’t. When it comes to a general election, if you pin a rosette to a turd only the colour of the rosette matters. It’s a fundamentally broken system.
It amazes me that people can have seen the changes at general elections over the last decade and still think this way.
A majority of seats are completely safe even with the changes over the last 4 elections.
Regardless, changes (or lack thereof) didn't seem to be the point. More that individual merits are irrelevant and changes will or wont happen pretty much purely due to party label.
Can't really see a solution. Its damn near impossible to assess whether they dova good job and most won't be well known.
There isn't a solution because there isn't a problem. If your problem is about how voters vote in an 'omov' free society, that's not a problem, it's an opinion.
You can't resolve problems in democracy by anything other than the instruments of democracy; campaigning, persuading, standing for election, party organisation, voting.
All other solutions are basically imposing opinions in an authoritarian manner.
When it comes to 'safe seats', most people's thinking is backwards. They look at the current maths and declare this seat is 'safe'. All that means is that voters as a whole have acted a certain way. They are entitled to. It is in their power. Unless it binds their future decisions in a way which forces them they remain free next time to do as they will.
Tamworth is a safe Tory seat. But it was Labour only recently.
In recent Irish general elections under STV there have been examples where the sitting TD for a party in a constituency had been defeated by a new candidate for their party, because the voters have decided they didn't like the incumbent that much.
This makes it easier for voters to turf out wrong 'uns, without them having to vote for a party with a very different set of policies to do so.
And the voters are still free to vote for whatever bunch of wrong 'uns they want, if those TDs are persuasive enough, as the success of the Healy-Raes demonstrates.
If we’re going to do the “but the mens” argument, it’s worth pointing out that he is accused of groping three men in two incidents while pissed out of his skull. To say “the matter is closed” because he resigned his sinecure and apologised for being drunk is disrespectful of the potential victims.
The principle has been set with Parish et Al: withdraw the whip, conduct the investigation, return the whip or crack it depending on the outcome. Trying to brush it aside because this guy is one of your pals is boorish nepotism. Tractor Man has a right to be cross.
Is that "but the mens [rea]? But the mens is different from the womens? Genuinely confused
Currently sitting on a bus to Newcastle, very hungover, because I need to collect my abandoned car from yesterday. How are everyone else’s mornings going?
If there is a by-election, is there a man in the white suit option?
Michael Fabricant in the neighbouring constituency should be in a straitjacket.
Oh, sorry, is that not what you meant?
Fabricant is an enigma, a barometer for a broken parliamentary system.
How he became.and remains and MP is a mystery. You would have thought someone along the way, be they a Tory selector or a voter would have said hang on, this is not necessarily the best person to represent us.
(There are others like this, but he stands out as a big Why?)
Only voters can sort these things.
But they don’t. When it comes to a general election, if you pin a rosette to a turd only the colour of the rosette matters. It’s a fundamentally broken system.
It amazes me that people can have seen the changes at general elections over the last decade and still think this way.
I give you David Tredinnick who only stood down in 2019 and who held his seat from 1987 and in the last 20 years kept increasing his majority (so the period you talk of). Yet he was as mad as a box of frogs and in fairness that is libeling the box of frogs.
165 Conservative MPs got elected, even when John Major was Prime Minister with a "Kick Me" sign stuck on his back.
200 Labour MPs got elected, even when led by non-Magic Grandpa Jez.
That's about half the House of Commons that can reasonably be said to be absurdly safe seats.
Keep onside with the party selectorate, avoid Men in White Suits, and it's basically a job for life.
If we’re going to do the “but the mens” argument, it’s worth pointing out that he is accused of groping three men in two incidents while pissed out of his skull. To say “the matter is closed” because he resigned his sinecure and apologised for being drunk is disrespectful of the potential victims.
The principle has been set with Parish et Al: withdraw the whip, conduct the investigation, return the whip or crack it depending on the outcome. Trying to brush it aside because this guy is one of your pals is boorish nepotism. Tractor Man has a right to be cross.
Is that "but the mens [rea]? But the mens is different from the womens? Genuinely confused
Couldn’t find the quote up thread when I switched devices, but there was some insinuation that he was being immediately condemned because he’s a man, with a few culture war phrases thrown in. “But the mens” is a parody of that attitude, similar to “but won’t someone please think of the children”. I apologise if it clouded my point: trying to paint this as a culture war hit job against older men ignores that his string of possible victims were men.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
Thank you but that doesn't quite work for the example I've highlighted. It says you do it when there's a whole load of reasons for something and you want to head off having to list them - so you say (literally) "because reasons".
Eg I can't stand Boris Johnson because reasons. Implication (a correct one) is there are just too many reasons to mention individually. So ... "because reasons". Fair enough. I happen to like listing them all but I can see how that's a good way of saving time.
However, Leon's one here - "because Covid" - isn't that. All he's done is drop the word "of".
My sense is people are doing it because they think it sounds a bit youthful and internety and adds a bit of punch. But I'm not sure it does. Affectation, I think, and I recommend we try and avoid it. No biggie obviously. Worth an airing but I won't bother mentioning it again.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
This government is getting into some interesting areas, without of course doing anything as mundane as actually running the country. So we had restaurant marketing from Sunak during the pandemic. Now they are getting heavily into subprime mortgages, offering 50 year mortgages that you can pass onto your children as their inheritance. They also removing bank stress tests for mortgage lending, presumably to avoid having to plan for any scenarios where it all goes horribly wrong.
Thank you but that doesn't quite work for the example I've highlighted. It says you do it when there's a whole load of reasons for something and you want to head off having to list them - so you say (literally) "because reasons".
Eg I can't stand Boris Johnson because reasons. Implication (a correct one) is there are just too many reasons to mention individually. So ... "because reasons". Fair enough. I happen to like listing them all but I can see how that's a good way of saving time.
However, Leon's one here - "because Covid" - isn't that. All he's done is drop the word "of".
My sense is people are doing it because they think it sounds a bit youthful and internety and adds a bit of punch. But I'm not sure it does. Affectation, I think, and I recommend we try and avoid it. No biggie obviously. Worth an airing but I won't bother mentioning it again.
It’s a neat shortening of the language, therefore useful (see what I did there?)
The “of” in “because of” is unnecessary, indeed I’d say it’s ugly (but that’s subjective). You don’t need “of”. When you say “because Covid” the meaning is clear. Why add “of”?
Presumably you object to “I’m” or “weren’t” or “Arsenal”, instead of “The Arsenal”
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
Agreed. I recall seeing strap line for a company that was ‘passionate about logistics’.
Thank you but that doesn't quite work for the example I've highlighted. It says you do it when there's a whole load of reasons for something and you want to head off having to list them - so you say (literally) "because reasons".
Eg I can't stand Boris Johnson because reasons. Implication (a correct one) is there are just too many reasons to mention individually. So ... "because reasons". Fair enough. I happen to like listing them all but I can see how that's a good way of saving time.
However, Leon's one here - "because Covid" - isn't that. All he's done is drop the word "of".
My sense is people are doing it because they think it sounds a bit youthful and internety and adds a bit of punch. But I'm not sure it does. Affectation, I think, and I recommend we try and avoid it. No biggie obviously. Worth an airing but I won't bother mentioning it again.
It's also used when the logic is mystifying in the speaker's eyes. Boris Johnson retains the admiration of one third of the electorate. Because reasons.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
This government is getting into some interesting areas, without of course doing anything as mundane as actually running the country. So we had restaurant marketing from Sunak during the pandemic. Now they are getting heavily into subprime mortgages, offering 50 year mortgages that you can pass onto your children as their inheritance. They also removing bank stress tests for mortgage lending, presumably to avoid having to plan for any scenarios where it all goes horribly wrong.
A fall in house prices would finish them for a decade. So anything and everything must be thrown at it.
Currently sitting on a bus to Newcastle, very hungover, because I need to collect my abandoned car from yesterday. How are everyone else’s mornings going?
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
"Passion", as an identifiable and essential quality, in football players and managers needs a stake through it.
If there is a by-election, is there a man in the white suit option?
Michael Fabricant in the neighbouring constituency should be in a straitjacket.
Oh, sorry, is that not what you meant?
Fabricant is an enigma, a barometer for a broken parliamentary system.
How he became.and remains and MP is a mystery. You would have thought someone along the way, be they a Tory selector or a voter would have said hang on, this is not necessarily the best person to represent us.
(There are others like this, but he stands out as a big Why?)
Only voters can sort these things.
But they don’t. When it comes to a general election, if you pin a rosette to a turd only the colour of the rosette matters. It’s a fundamentally broken system.
It amazes me that people can have seen the changes at general elections over the last decade and still think this way.
A majority of seats are completely safe even with the changes over the last 4 elections.
Regardless, changes (or lack thereof) didn't seem to be the point. More that individual merits are irrelevant and changes will or wont happen pretty much purely due to party label.
Can't really see a solution. Its damn near impossible to assess whether they dova good job and most won't be well known.
STV, or an open-list PR system, gives the power to the voter to vote on a party basis and between candidates for each party. It would make it a lot harder for MPs like Pincher to hang on as they would be competing for votes against other Conservatives, not just candidates from other parties.
Pincher's, or the Tory, vote has gone up steadily at the last few elections in Tamworth. Is that the 'Midlands thing' or is there a personal element?
On the Guardian's point about obesity is there a correlation between levels of obesity in the population and the Conservative vote? I don't see a lot of obese people in Witham!
BMI is the most statistically reliable indicator of leave/remain proclivity.
People who try to be prescriptive about English = halfwits
The genius of the language is its playful tolerance of everything, its effortless absorption of novelties and loan words; it is too big and grand to worry about tiny evolutions. It is spoken well and badly by two billion people, you cannot control it so don’t bother
Fuss-budget neuroticism about linguistic innovations is for much smaller, lesser languages. French
This government is getting into some interesting areas, without of course doing anything as mundane as actually running the country. So we had restaurant marketing from Sunak during the pandemic. Now they are getting heavily into subprime mortgages, offering 50 year mortgages that you can pass onto your children as their inheritance. They also removing bank stress tests for mortgage lending, presumably to avoid having to plan for any scenarios where it all goes horribly wrong.
A fall in house prices would finish them for a decade. So anything and everything must be thrown at it.
"At first you go bankrupt slowly then suddenly"
The seeds of the Conservative Party bankruptcy date back at least as far as May's government, but accelerating under Johnson.
I'm just sorry they are taking the country down with them.
Ah thanks. Yes the net has changed language, no question.
Which I'm fine with (although pls note my mild dislike for the missing "of") because that's how it should be. You don't want an ossified tongue.
I've improved my ways on this. I'm tech backward and until recently used to send texts with multiple sentences, each one full and correct as to grammar, spelling and punctuation.
But then I realized that's not how it's done. A text (or a whatsup) like that is actually a bad text. It's not right for the medium and reads poorly. Looks odd to the recipient. So now I only do short ones and I make sure to use abbvs and I don't worry about the spelling or the grammar. Much better.
I’m on the bus to my mate’s place, and just saw a fat woman and (presumably) her fat daughter use the bus for a less than half mile journey. They weren’t carrying shopping.
Thank you but that doesn't quite work for the example I've highlighted. It says you do it when there's a whole load of reasons for something and you want to head off having to list them - so you say (literally) "because reasons".
Eg I can't stand Boris Johnson because reasons. Implication (a correct one) is there are just too many reasons to mention individually. So ... "because reasons". Fair enough. I happen to like listing them all but I can see how that's a good way of saving time.
However, Leon's one here - "because Covid" - isn't that. All he's done is drop the word "of".
My sense is people are doing it because they think it sounds a bit youthful and internety and adds a bit of punch. But I'm not sure it does. Affectation, I think, and I recommend we try and avoid it. No biggie obviously. Worth an airing but I won't bother mentioning it again.
It’s a neat shortening of the language, therefore useful (see what I did there?)
The “of” in “because of” is unnecessary, indeed I’d say it’s ugly (but that’s subjective). You don’t need “of”. When you say “because Covid” the meaning is clear. Why add “of”?
Presumably you object to “I’m” or “weren’t” or “Arsenal”, instead of “The Arsenal”
But language is notoriously multiply rdndnt, bcs rsns. U cn lv t ll t vwls and a good 20% of the words and still be understood. Doesn't mean you should.
I’m on the bus to my mate’s place, and just saw a fat woman and (presumably) her fat daughter use the bus for a less than half mile journey. They weren’t carrying shopping.
I'd do that and I am not fat and it would be much harder work if I was
Ah thanks. Yes the net has changed language, no question.
Which I'm fine with (although pls note my mild dislike for the missing "of") because that's how it should be. You don't want an ossified tongue.
I've improved my ways on this. I'm tech backward and until recently used to send texts with multiple sentences, each one full and correct as to grammar, spelling and punctuation.
But then I realized that's not how it's done. A text (or a whatsup) like that is actually a bad text. It's not right for the medium and reads poorly. Looks odd to the recipient. So now I only do short ones and I make sure to use abbvs and I don't worry about the spelling or the grammar. Much better.
You need to drop the full stops at the end of paragraphs as well. They seem passive aggressive to people under 40, and give off a tone of mild peevishness
Over the next few hours and days were going to get a lot of deflection from Boris and his supporters. It's important to stay focused on a simple fact. He claimed he didn't know about Pincher. He did know about Pincher. And he appointed him anyway. https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1543144352330964992
And?
Neither "Johnson appoints terrible people" nor "Johnson tells fibs" is news, is it?
Or has Dan Hodges only just noticed?
I suppose one should make an effort to stay shocked.
Genuinely important. High standards cannot always be maintained in politics as in life, but it doesn't mean we should just ignore them completely.
Politics might be inevivitably a bit grubby, as the saying goes, but it is not required that you cover yourself in shit.
Yes, I so agree. In fact of all the things that have gone wrong in recent times I'd say this one is the most important. The deportment of the likes of Trump and Johnson in high elected office - without consequence - causing people to lose their capacity for being shocked and angry at egregious behaviour in politics. The normalization of lying in particular.
This is a great book, incidentally, if you like popular linguistics and language and you spend time on the internet. Strongly recommended. (I am an Old Internet Person by her classification.)
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
Ah thanks. Yes the net has changed language, no question.
Which I'm fine with (although pls note my mild dislike for the missing "of") because that's how it should be. You don't want an ossified tongue.
I've improved my ways on this. I'm tech backward and until recently used to send texts with multiple sentences, each one full and correct as to grammar, spelling and punctuation.
But then I realized that's not how it's done. A text (or a whatsup) like that is actually a bad text. It's not right for the medium and reads poorly. Looks odd to the recipient. So now I only do short ones and I make sure to use abbvs and I don't worry about the spelling or the grammar. Much better.
You need to drop the full stops at the end of paragraphs as well. They seem passive aggressive to people under 40, and give off a tone of mild peevishness
Like this.
Or
Bye.
On here you mean? Ooo not sure I'm ready for that.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
All Christianity, not just our Constantinople and Russian friends. 'Icon' (eikon/ikon) is a proper bible word. (Eg Colossians 1.15).
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
All your colleagues who have retired still support them I bet.
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
Most polls still have the Tories slightly above the 30% they got in 1997 and the 31% they got in 2001. Yougov, Comres, Redfield and Opinium still have them above the 32% they got in 2005
This is a great book, incidentally, if you like popular linguistics and language and you spend time on the internet. Strongly recommended. (I am an Old Internet Person by her classification.)
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
I cannot imagine the late MP for Castle Point, Bernard Braine, who I knew fairly well, being happy in the present Conservative party. He just wouldn't have fitted!
People who try to be prescriptive about English = halfwits
The genius of the language is its playful tolerance of everything, its effortless absorption of novelties and loan words; it is too big and grand to worry about tiny evolutions. It is spoken well and badly by two billion people, you cannot control it so don’t bother
Fuss-budget neuroticism about linguistic innovations is for much smaller, lesser languages. French
Totally. I love it. Have a real feel for it too - this is why I'm good at spotting affectations which don't *quite* deliver what the user thinks they do.
If everyone gets a 15% pay rise that just makes inflation worse, perpetuating the problem.
We can take pain and get things in order over the long term, or get relief now and then have the same problem down the line.
The question is whether inflation is bad for a little while or a long while.
If we got above inflation pay rises in times of low inflation I’d mind less. And if shareholders got below inflation increases I’d mind less. But we bang on about pay while trying to pretend that the money printing we did to prop up the asset market wasn’t the major driver, and that annoys me.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
All Christianity, not just our Constantinople and Russian friends. 'Icon' (eikon/ikon) is a proper bible word. (Eg Colossians 1.15).
Never mind an icon, there's a whole iconostasis in St. Dunstan In The West, Fleet Street, which is CofE. Plus a striking clock from 1671 on the outside, which was the first one in London with a minute hand.
Ah thanks. Yes the net has changed language, no question.
Which I'm fine with (although pls note my mild dislike for the missing "of") because that's how it should be. You don't want an ossified tongue.
I've improved my ways on this. I'm tech backward and until recently used to send texts with multiple sentences, each one full and correct as to grammar, spelling and punctuation.
But then I realized that's not how it's done. A text (or a whatsup) like that is actually a bad text. It's not right for the medium and reads poorly. Looks odd to the recipient. So now I only do short ones and I make sure to use abbvs and I don't worry about the spelling or the grammar. Much better.
Disagree. I use proper spelling, punctuation and grammar in texts, because I prefer receiving the same. I've also mostly stopped using emojis, because I found I was using them as a way to avoid putting the effort into being specific about what I thought or felt, and I decided the people I was communicating with deserved the effort.
You're still looking for rules to follow, rather than making the choice for yourself about how you want to use the medium. The point is that there's no right or wrong way to use English. There are no rules. Send texts however you want.
"On Thursday evening, the Kremlin submitted a bill to the State Duma on "special economic measures" for "counterterrorist and other operations" outside of Russia.
An explanatory note attached to the bill said that there is, particularly amid Putin's war against Ukraine, "a short-term increased need for the repair of weapons and military equipment.""
"The bill proposed, among other measures, "the implementation of material assets from state reserves" and "the temporary activation of mobilization capacities and facilities," as well as overtime work in "individual organizations.""
So, on one hand, this suggests a significant shortage of Russian material and manpower. On the other hand, it suggests that Russia is mobilising more of its massive industrial capability to sustaining the war - still without calling it a war.
It's hard to see how this improves Russia's economy in the short and medium term. And I wonder how many of the 'capabilities' mobilised will be young men sent to Ukraine to fight.
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
tourism has always been rationed by price
Given the place is sinking under the weight of all the tourists and their ships I can’t blame them. Really didn’t enjoy it when I visited because it was so crowded.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
I’ve seen, like a poster above, people on LinkedIn etc who are “passionate” about their logistics business. Yes, it’s risible, but if it’s true then I have to say I’m a jealous. I’ve suffered dysthymia since before I was a teen and I’d love to be passionate about anything, anything at all. All I seem to get to feel is anger, cynicism and sadness while some part of my brain keeps me going as a high functioning depressive. So, if it’s true, and you do feel passionate about your quantity surveying business, good on you. I wish I felt passionate about anything positive.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
I’ve seen, like a poster above, people on LinkedIn etc who are “passionate” about their logistics business. Yes, it’s risible, but if it’s true then I have to say I’m a jealous. I’ve suffered dysthymia since before I was a teen and I’d love to be passionate about anything, anything at all. All I seem to get to feel is anger, cynicism and sadness while some part of my brain keeps me going as a high functioning depressive. So, if it’s true, and you do feel passionate about your quantity surveying business, good on you. I wish I felt passionate about anything positive.
Very, very unfortunate. I wish you well. It's great being able and happy to celebrate something even although it's not one's own success! Doesn't apply of course, to one's own defeats!
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
tourism has always been rationed by price
Given the place is sinking under the weight of all the tourists and their ships I can’t blame them. Really didn’t enjoy it when I visited because it was so crowded.
I was hoping (with all due respect to the fraternity on here who enjoy such holidays) that Covid would kill off the cruise ship business. The environmental and health harms, particularly in Venice, far outweigh their utility.
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
tourism has always been rationed by price
Given the place is sinking under the weight of all the tourists and their ships I can’t blame them. Really didn’t enjoy it when I visited because it was so crowded.
I was hoping (with all due respect to the fraternity on here who enjoy such holidays) that Covid would kill off the cruise ship business. The environmental and health harms, particularly in Venice, far outweigh their utility.
It’s one of my guilty pleasures I’m afraid. I love touring holidays where the hotel comes with me. But I refuse itineraries that include Venice. Should be banned from the city entirely.
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
tourism has always been rationed by price
Given the place is sinking under the weight of all the tourists and their ships I can’t blame them. Really didn’t enjoy it when I visited because it was so crowded.
I was hoping (with all due respect to the fraternity on here who enjoy such holidays) that Covid would kill off the cruise ship business. The environmental and health harms, particularly in Venice, far outweigh their utility.
While I can understand the view, due to my currently reduced mobility I have been seriously thinking about a cruise. I would like to be taken to see something!
Landlords can increase rent by 15% but renters can’t ask for 15% pay rises.
Tickets can go up by inflation, but if rail workers ask for the same with wages they’re being ridiculous.
Everything can go up: prices, asset inflation, profit, rents - but not wages. See how it works?
That has an air of Bastani to my ear.
I agree. It has a feel of comparing non-comparables to generate superficial outrage. It's like "I was forced to do X" when it's actually a voluntary decision - ignoring all the other constraints.
On just the first one, long-run rents have increased more slowly than CPI, which is why rent-controls to inflation + a little, which will validate the control arrangement increase, will be bad news for tenants.
Self-declared tenant-advocates are generally as ignorant as bricks or as thick as planks, who only look at a tiny fraction of the data - typically advertised rents for new tenancies. Whilst ignoring that in place rents, which are 97-98% of them, rise far more slowly.
Thank you but that doesn't quite work for the example I've highlighted. It says you do it when there's a whole load of reasons for something and you want to head off having to list them - so you say (literally) "because reasons".
Eg I can't stand Boris Johnson because reasons. Implication (a correct one) is there are just too many reasons to mention individually. So ... "because reasons". Fair enough. I happen to like listing them all but I can see how that's a good way of saving time.
However, Leon's one here - "because Covid" - isn't that. All he's done is drop the word "of".
My sense is people are doing it because they think it sounds a bit youthful and internety and adds a bit of punch. But I'm not sure it does. Affectation, I think, and I recommend we try and avoid it. No biggie obviously. Worth an airing but I won't bother mentioning it again.
It's also used when the logic is mystifying in the speaker's eyes. Boris Johnson retains the admiration of one third of the electorate. Because reasons.
Ah yes, that is slightly different to my example. So as in that 'shrug' emoji - which I love and use a lot in my phone comms. It's very flexible - eg "what can you do?" or "god knows" or "can you believe that?" or even (at a pinch) "no shit sherlock".
Currently sitting on a bus to Newcastle, very hungover, because I need to collect my abandoned car from yesterday. How are everyone else’s mornings going?
I went out last night for the first time in months, was woken up in the middle of the night by an earthquake and a very stressed wife, had a glass of wine with the bacon sandwich this morning, and will wait until tomorrow to go and get the car. Meanwhile, trying to watch rugby, cricket and racing cars all at the same time.
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
It's amazing how one's colleagues always reinforce one's own views.
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
tourism has always been rationed by price
Given the place is sinking under the weight of all the tourists and their ships I can’t blame them. Really didn’t enjoy it when I visited because it was so crowded.
I was hoping (with all due respect to the fraternity on here who enjoy such holidays) that Covid would kill off the cruise ship business. The environmental and health harms, particularly in Venice, far outweigh their utility.
While I can understand the view, due to my currently reduced mobility I have been seriously thinking about a cruise. I would like to be taken to see something!
I can understand that. Maybe a sustainable compromise could be reached but those mega, multi storey, cruise ships are an absolute nonsense. Perhaps some enterprising chap could invent a “cruise ship” on rails. A mock up of the Orient Express chugging round the sites of Europe. Could go places cruise ships couldn’t as well.
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
I’ve seen, like a poster above, people on LinkedIn etc who are “passionate” about their logistics business. Yes, it’s risible, but if it’s true then I have to say I’m a jealous. I’ve suffered dysthymia since before I was a teen and I’d love to be passionate about anything, anything at all. All I seem to get to feel is anger, cynicism and sadness while some part of my brain keeps me going as a high functioning depressive. So, if it’s true, and you do feel passionate about your quantity surveying business, good on you. I wish I felt passionate about anything positive.
Landlords can increase rent by 15% but renters can’t ask for 15% pay rises.
Tickets can go up by inflation, but if rail workers ask for the same with wages they’re being ridiculous.
Everything can go up: prices, asset inflation, profit, rents - but not wages. See how it works?
That has an air of Bastani to my ear.
I agree. It has a feel of comparing non-comparables to generate superficial outrage. It's like "I was forced to do X" when it's actually a voluntary decision - ignoring all the other constraints.
On just the first one, long-run rents have increased more slowly than CPI, which is why rent-controls to inflation + a little, which will validate the control arrangement increase, will be bad news for tenants.
Self-declared tenant-advocates are generally as ignorant as bricks or as thick as planks, who only look at a tiny fraction of the data - typically advertised rents for new tenancies. Whilst ignoring that in place rents, which are 97-98% of them, rise far more slowly.
Until the 1970s of course renting was quite common. In the early years of the last century it was private renting; after the Second World War we had the massive extension of council housing. It's only in the last few years, post Thatcher, that we have regarded ownership of homes as essential! Has the change really been a good thing?
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
Most polls still have the Tories slightly above the 30% they got in 1997 and the 31% they got in 2001. Yougov, Comres, Redfield and Opinium still have them above the 32% they got in 2005
Language evolves, and generally new usage and the breaking of arbitrary rules does not bother me. However, the prevalence of ‘iconic’, which has spread like Japanese knotweed in recent years, really grates. I’d love to see its use once again solely restricted to discussions about Orthodox Christianity.
See also passionate. It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
I’ve seen, like a poster above, people on LinkedIn etc who are “passionate” about their logistics business. Yes, it’s risible, but if it’s true then I have to say I’m a jealous. I’ve suffered dysthymia since before I was a teen and I’d love to be passionate about anything, anything at all. All I seem to get to feel is anger, cynicism and sadness while some part of my brain keeps me going as a high functioning depressive. So, if it’s true, and you do feel passionate about your quantity surveying business, good on you. I wish I felt passionate about anything positive.
In Dave Eggers book 'the circle', he suggests that politicians 'go clear'; ie they walk around with cameras on them livestreaming everything they do, all day; 24/7. This is set up by 'the circle', which is probably meant to represent a dystopian mix of google and facebook, and the aim is actually to weaken politicians, who represent a threat to the circle, by making their job impossible. The aim is so the public can judge their conduct continuously. In his latest novel, the circle has become 'the every', and and Eggers sets out a scenario where the leading political opponent of the every is invited on to the campus. He is led through a gym with scantily clad young tech workers, and his every eye movement is tracked. The every then, by analysing his eye movements as he walks through the gym, identify a thousands of examples of indiscretions and sexual misconduct; published immediately on the internet; and thus destroying his career.
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
Most polls still have the Tories slightly above the 30% they got in 1997 and the 31% they got in 2001. Yougov, Comres, Redfield and Opinium still have them above the 32% they got in 2005
In Dave Eggers book 'the circle', he suggests that politicians 'go clear'; ie they walk around with cameras on them livestreaming everything they do, all day; 24/7. This is set up by 'the circle', which is probably meant to represent a dystopian mix of google and facebook, and the aim is actually to weaken politicians, who represent a threat to the circle, by making their job impossible. The aim is so the public can judge their conduct continuously. In his latest novel, the circle has become 'the every', and and Eggers sets out a scenario where the leading political opponent of the every is invited on to the campus. He is led through a gym with scantily clad young tech workers, and his every eye movement is tracked. The every then, by analysing his eye movements as he walks through the gym, identify a thousands of examples of indiscretions and sexual misconduct; published immediately on the internet; and thus destroying his career.
Or the politician could just TELL people, upfront, like me, and save the hassle
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
tourism has always been rationed by price
Given the place is sinking under the weight of all the tourists and their ships I can’t blame them. Really didn’t enjoy it when I visited because it was so crowded.
I was hoping (with all due respect to the fraternity on here who enjoy such holidays) that Covid would kill off the cruise ship business. The environmental and health harms, particularly in Venice, far outweigh their utility.
While I can understand the view, due to my currently reduced mobility I have been seriously thinking about a cruise. I would like to be taken to see something!
I can understand that. Maybe a sustainable compromise could be reached but those mega, multi storey, cruise ships are an absolute nonsense. Perhaps some enterprising chap could invent a “cruise ship” on rails. A mock up of the Orient Express chugging round the sites of Europe. Could go places cruise ships couldn’t as well.
A few years ago we had a very nice trip to Iceland on quite a small cruise ship. Very pleasant company, some excellent talks and we learned a lot! I don't think the line runs anymore
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
It's amazing how one's colleagues always reinforce one's own views.
The mere fact that they are working is a decent indicator they are not voting for Bluekip Conservatives.
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
tourism has always been rationed by price
Given the place is sinking under the weight of all the tourists and their ships I can’t blame them. Really didn’t enjoy it when I visited because it was so crowded.
I was hoping (with all due respect to the fraternity on here who enjoy such holidays) that Covid would kill off the cruise ship business. The environmental and health harms, particularly in Venice, far outweigh their utility.
While I can understand the view, due to my currently reduced mobility I have been seriously thinking about a cruise. I would like to be taken to see something!
I can understand that. Maybe a sustainable compromise could be reached but those mega, multi storey, cruise ships are an absolute nonsense. Perhaps some enterprising chap could invent a “cruise ship” on rails. A mock up of the Orient Express chugging round the sites of Europe. Could go places cruise ships couldn’t as well.
A few years ago we had a very nice trip to Iceland on quite a small cruise ship. Very pleasant company, some excellent talks and we learned a lot! I don't think the line runs anymore
I don’t want to ruin everyone’s fun! Flying’s as bad. Hate being Mr Puritan.
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
Most polls still have the Tories slightly above the 30% they got in 1997 and the 31% they got in 2001. Yougov, Comres, Redfield and Opinium still have them above the 32% they got in 2005
So what, unless we Tories rule for all eternity in a democracy we are bound to lose again sometime
There’s losing and losing.
There’s the time when you lose so you come back in 7-10 years refreshed and ready to govern again.
And there’s being pounded into absolute rubble so that you never recover.
Unfortunately in recent decades both major parties seem to have gone for option B without ever quite managing to be eliminated and replaced, which is distinctly unhealthy for our democratic system.
The Tories appear to be going for option C this time which is the one done so spectacularly by their Canadian brethren a few years back - utter annihilation in one election.
Landlords can increase rent by 15% but renters can’t ask for 15% pay rises.
Tickets can go up by inflation, but if rail workers ask for the same with wages they’re being ridiculous.
Everything can go up: prices, asset inflation, profit, rents - but not wages. See how it works?
That has an air of Bastani to my ear.
OTOH, surely allowing wages to spiral pushes up prices especially if those wage rises are in the transport industries that move and supply the goods. This is why holding down wages has always been the first line of defence against inflation.
You're still looking for rules to follow, rather than making the choice for yourself about how you want to use the medium. The point is that there's no right or wrong way to use English. There are no rules. Send texts however you want.
There are no rules, but there are conventions and consensus that build up among language-using communities. If you deviate from the consensus in the group of people you talk to, then you can expect to be misinterpreted at least some of the time.
Landlords can increase rent by 15% but renters can’t ask for 15% pay rises.
Tickets can go up by inflation, but if rail workers ask for the same with wages they’re being ridiculous.
Everything can go up: prices, asset inflation, profit, rents - but not wages. See how it works?
That has an air of Bastani to my ear.
I agree. It has a feel of comparing non-comparables to generate superficial outrage. It's like "I was forced to do X" when it's actually a voluntary decision - ignoring all the other constraints.
On just the first one, long-run rents have increased more slowly than CPI, which is why rent-controls to inflation + a little, which will validate the control arrangement increase, will be bad news for tenants.
Self-declared tenant-advocates are generally as ignorant as bricks or as thick as planks, who only look at a tiny fraction of the data - typically advertised rents for new tenancies. Whilst ignoring that in place rents, which are 97-98% of them, rise far more slowly.
One of the stated advantages of more renting is that it should increase labour mobility, because it's less hassle to find somewhere to rent then it is to buy and sell houses.
If there's a large gap between new rents and existing rents then that breaks down, as tenants are tired to their current tenancy by the expense of renting in a new tenancy.
I'm also interested how this relates to the level of local housing allowance used for housing benefit levels. Is that calculated from new tenancies or existing rents? Either way people who move for a job put themselves at greater risk of losing their home if the job doesn't last than if they stayed put, because their rent will be higher. This all discourages risk-taking, and makes it harder for people to move to where the work is.
It's a sign of the housing market not working. Not a sign that actually the status quo is all fine.
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
Most polls still have the Tories slightly above the 30% they got in 1997 and the 31% they got in 2001. Yougov, Comres, Redfield and Opinium still have them above the 32% they got in 2005
So what, unless we Tories rule for all eternity in a democracy we are bound to lose again sometime
There’s losing and losing.
There’s the time when you lose so you come back in 7-10 years refreshed and ready to govern again.
And there’s being pounded into absolute rubble so that you never recover.
Unfortunately in recent decades both major parties seem to have gone for option B without ever quite managing to be eliminated and replaced, which is distinctly unhealthy for our democratic system.
The Tories appear to be going for option C this time which is the one done so spectacularly by their Canadian brethren a few years back - utter annihilation in one election.
Except as I said the Tories are still polling higher in most polls than they got from 1997 to 2005 and also over double the 16% the Canadian Tories got in 1993
Ah thanks. Yes the net has changed language, no question.
Which I'm fine with (although pls note my mild dislike for the missing "of") because that's how it should be. You don't want an ossified tongue.
I've improved my ways on this. I'm tech backward and until recently used to send texts with multiple sentences, each one full and correct as to grammar, spelling and punctuation.
But then I realized that's not how it's done. A text (or a whatsup) like that is actually a bad text. It's not right for the medium and reads poorly. Looks odd to the recipient. So now I only do short ones and I make sure to use abbvs and I don't worry about the spelling or the grammar. Much better.
Disagree. I use proper spelling, punctuation and grammar in texts, because I prefer receiving the same. I've also mostly stopped using emojis, because I found I was using them as a way to avoid putting the effort into being specific about what I thought or felt, and I decided the people I was communicating with deserved the effort.
You're still looking for rules to follow, rather than making the choice for yourself about how you want to use the medium. The point is that there's no right or wrong way to use English. There are no rules. Send texts however you want.
No Rules, yes I pretty much agree with that as regards language (within reason obviously - you do need to be understood).
But I do genuinely prefer this new short and sloppy way - both for send and receive. I think how I used to do it was kind of failing to adapt to a new medium. And it was dreadfully inefficient. Bit like sticking with maps for ages after satnav came along (which I also did tbh).
Much of it is age, I guess. I know I probably come across on here as about 38 or something, due to the youthful brio and progressive politics, but in fact I'm 61.
On topic, if the Conservatives don't win Tamworth they won't win anywhere.
I'd say 'please' but there is a conservative strand of opinion which should be represented in parliament. Just by only a few, though!
It's striking how few of my English colleagues now support the Conservatives. That wasn't the case say 20 years ago. Obviously Conservatives have picked up votes elsewhere but the original cohort are no longer represented.
Most polls still have the Tories slightly above the 30% they got in 1997 and the 31% they got in 2001. Yougov, Comres, Redfield and Opinium still have them above the 32% they got in 2005
So what, unless we Tories rule for all eternity in a democracy we are bound to lose again sometime
There’s losing and losing.
There’s the time when you lose so you come back in 7-10 years refreshed and ready to govern again.
And there’s being pounded into absolute rubble so that you never recover.
Unfortunately in recent decades both major parties seem to have gone for option B without ever quite managing to be eliminated and replaced, which is distinctly unhealthy for our democratic system.
The Tories appear to be going for option C this time which is the one done so spectacularly by their Canadian brethren a few years back - utter annihilation in one election.
Except as I said the Tories are still polling higher in most polls than they got from 1997 to 2005 and also over double the 16% the Canadian Tories got in 1993
You mean they’re so useless they can’t even organise a proper clusterfuck?
Morning all. The MRP YouGov is another piece in the mysterious puzzle for Tory MPs of 'how screwed are we?' Very screwed. In all the worst places. You could always try actually doing something about it. #activategreysuits #ordont #wedontcareanymore
Now that Sir Beer Korma has committed to the Union, and announced that he will oppose any Sindyref, i believe we have reached THE HYUFD SINGULARITY
That’s the moment when even @HYUFD abandons any real attachment to the ‘Tory cause, and says he doesn’t especially mind if Labour wins, next time
I have said I don't especially dislike Starmer even if obviously I still back the Conservatives
QED. Your lukewarm words say it all
Deep inside you’ve accepted that the Tories are likely to lose, and now the Union is safe, you aren’t as fussed as you once were
I’m in roughly the same place. I hate the Wokeness of the Left but the Tories are in a wretched state and need a period in opposition to renew. They need fresh ideas and, God help us, a better leader
Starmer is not Corbyn, He is not a menace to the nation. He’s deeply uninspiring but he’s basically safe. MEH
Comments
This makes it easier for voters to turf out wrong 'uns, without them having to vote for a party with a very different set of policies to do so.
And the voters are still free to vote for whatever bunch of wrong 'uns they want, if those TDs are persuasive enough, as the success of the Healy-Raes demonstrates.
A bus station is where buses stop
My workstation...
200 Labour MPs got elected, even when led by non-Magic Grandpa Jez.
That's about half the House of Commons that can reasonably be said to be absurdly safe seats.
Keep onside with the party selectorate, avoid Men in White Suits, and it's basically a job for life.
Eg I can't stand Boris Johnson because reasons. Implication (a correct one) is there are just too many reasons to mention individually. So ... "because reasons". Fair enough. I happen to like listing them all but I can see how that's a good way of saving time.
However, Leon's one here - "because Covid" - isn't that. All he's done is drop the word "of".
My sense is people are doing it because they think it sounds a bit youthful and internety and adds a bit of punch. But I'm not sure it does. Affectation, I think, and I recommend we try and avoid it. No biggie obviously. Worth an airing but I won't bother mentioning it again.
It appears now one can be the p word about making cup cakes and selling time shares, I'd rather it was kept for the tango and the like.
It’s a neat shortening of the language, therefore useful (see what I did there?)
The “of” in “because of” is unnecessary, indeed I’d say it’s ugly (but that’s subjective). You don’t need “of”. When you say “because Covid” the meaning is clear. Why add “of”?
Presumably you object to “I’m” or “weren’t” or “Arsenal”, instead of “The Arsenal”
Boris Johnson retains the admiration of one third of the electorate.
Because reasons.
So anything and everything must be thrown at it.
The genius of the language is its playful tolerance of everything, its effortless absorption of novelties and loan words; it is too big and grand to worry about tiny evolutions. It is spoken well and badly by two billion people, you cannot control it so don’t bother
Fuss-budget neuroticism about linguistic innovations is for much smaller, lesser languages. French
The seeds of the Conservative Party bankruptcy date back at least as far as May's government, but accelerating under Johnson.
I'm just sorry they are taking the country down with them.
Which I'm fine with (although pls note my mild dislike for the missing "of") because that's how it should be. You don't want an ossified tongue.
I've improved my ways on this. I'm tech backward and until recently used to send texts with multiple sentences, each one full and correct as to grammar, spelling and punctuation.
But then I realized that's not how it's done. A text (or a whatsup) like that is actually a bad text. It's not right for the medium and reads poorly. Looks odd to the recipient. So now I only do short ones and I make sure to use abbvs and I don't worry about the spelling or the grammar. Much better.
Although IANAL and so colour me unqualified to opine with authority.
No 10 considers 50-year mortgages that could pass down generations
Precis: Markets looking a little shaky, have we tried indentured servitude to the gods Persimmon, Wimpey and Barratts.
Cunts
Landlords can increase rent by 15% but renters can’t ask for 15% pay rises.
Tickets can go up by inflation, but if rail workers ask for the same with wages they’re being ridiculous.
Everything can go up: prices, asset inflation, profit, rents - but not wages. See how it works?
A few weeks ago it was reported that a female MP and a male MP had both been found to have sexually harassed a young male staffer.
Caroline Nokes went on Sky News to explain that it was all about misogyny...
There are some people who name's you do *not* want on your letters. Caroline Nokes is one of them.
Just by only a few, though!
Like this.
Or
Bye.
If everyone gets a 15% pay rise that just makes inflation worse, perpetuating the problem.
We can take pain and get things in order over the long term, or get relief now and then have the same problem down the line.
The question is whether inflation is bad for a little while or a long while.
I'll try it tho
Edit: No, don't like it.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/02/venice-day-trippers-will-have-to-make-reservations-and-pay-fee?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
I predicted this 6 years ago, Tourism will be rationed by price; only the rich will be allowed to see Venice. It has just been delayed by Covid
Good Week/Bad Week Index
Lab +158
LDm +115
Grn -6
Con -127
Adjusted Seat Value
Lab +2.6
LDm +1.9
Grn -0.1
Con -2.1
But enough of this cos point made and cos busy.
You're still looking for rules to follow, rather than making the choice for yourself about how you want to use the medium. The point is that there's no right or wrong way to use English. There are no rules. Send texts however you want.
An explanatory note attached to the bill said that there is, particularly amid Putin's war against Ukraine, "a short-term increased need for the repair of weapons and military equipment.""
"The bill proposed, among other measures, "the implementation of material assets from state reserves" and "the temporary activation of mobilization capacities and facilities," as well as overtime work in "individual organizations.""
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-putin-admits-running-out-weapons-ukraine-war-invasion-state-duma-law-1720957
So, on one hand, this suggests a significant shortage of Russian material and manpower. On the other hand, it suggests that Russia is mobilising more of its massive industrial capability to sustaining the war - still without calling it a war.
It's hard to see how this improves Russia's economy in the short and medium term. And I wonder how many of the 'capabilities' mobilised will be young men sent to Ukraine to fight.
(Edited to remove full stop)
Doesn't apply of course, to one's own defeats!
On just the first one, long-run rents have increased more slowly than CPI, which is why rent-controls to inflation + a little, which will validate the control arrangement increase, will be bad news for tenants.
Self-declared tenant-advocates are generally as ignorant as bricks or as thick as planks, who only look at a tiny fraction of the data - typically advertised rents for new tenancies. Whilst ignoring that in place rents, which are 97-98% of them, rise far more slowly.
Has the change really been a good thing?
It was entirely based on the EU and Brexit
Or less
In his latest novel, the circle has become 'the every', and and Eggers sets out a scenario where the leading political opponent of the every is invited on to the campus. He is led through a gym with scantily clad young tech workers, and his every eye movement is tracked. The every then, by analysing his eye movements as he walks through the gym, identify a thousands of examples of indiscretions and sexual misconduct; published immediately on the internet; and thus destroying his career.
I don't think the line runs anymore
That’s the moment when even @HYUFD abandons any real attachment to the ‘Tory cause, and says he doesn’t especially mind if Labour wins, next time
There’s the time when you lose so you come back in 7-10 years refreshed and ready to govern again.
And there’s being pounded into absolute rubble so that you never recover.
Unfortunately in recent decades both major parties seem to have gone for option B without ever quite managing to be eliminated and replaced, which is distinctly unhealthy for our democratic system.
The Tories appear to be going for option C this time which is the one done so spectacularly by their Canadian brethren a few years back - utter annihilation in one election.
If there's a large gap between new rents and existing rents then that breaks down, as tenants are tired to their current tenancy by the expense of renting in a new tenancy.
I'm also interested how this relates to the level of local housing allowance used for housing benefit levels. Is that calculated from new tenancies or existing rents? Either way people who move for a job put themselves at greater risk of losing their home if the job doesn't last than if they stayed put, because their rent will be higher. This all discourages risk-taking, and makes it harder for people to move to where the work is.
It's a sign of the housing market not working. Not a sign that actually the status quo is all fine.
But I do genuinely prefer this new short and sloppy way - both for send and receive. I think how I used to do it was kind of failing to adapt to a new medium. And it was dreadfully inefficient. Bit like sticking with maps for ages after satnav came along (which I also did tbh).
Much of it is age, I guess. I know I probably come across on here as about 38 or something, due to the youthful brio and progressive politics, but in fact I'm 61.
Raj Rajnarayanan
@RajlabN
Greater than Titan!
Seems like BA.2.75 has the potential to outcompete BA.5*/BA.4* and other circulating BA.2 lineages
Early days but growth advantage will be clear in a couple of weeks.
https://twitter.com/RajlabN/status/1542866412904976384
The MRP YouGov is another piece in the mysterious puzzle for Tory MPs of 'how screwed are we?'
Very screwed. In all the worst places.
You could always try actually doing something about it. #activategreysuits #ordont #wedontcareanymore
Deep inside you’ve accepted that the Tories are likely to lose, and now the Union is safe, you aren’t as fussed as you once were
I’m in roughly the same place. I hate the Wokeness of the Left but the Tories are in a wretched state and need a period in opposition to renew. They need fresh ideas and, God help us, a better leader
Starmer is not Corbyn, He is not a menace to the nation. He’s deeply uninspiring but he’s basically safe. MEH