Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
As things stand I think Liz Truss is going to win.
I bloody hope so!
I'm hoping for a Rishi/Truss run-off to the membership as its then literally win/win.
Either win - my bet comes in, or win - the best candidate wins and we get the best candidate to be PM. Either way I'd be happy. 👍
Truss is the Fuck the Union candidate par excellence. She’s head and shoulders above the rest.
I think the SNP would have big problems if they joined with the Conservatives under Truss to undermine the operation of a Lab/LD coalition or Lab minority government with C&S and perhaps even bring it down. PM Truss would make that outcome more likely I think. So be careful what you wish for.
“Joined with the Conservatives”?!? Ho ho. That’s a tremendous Labour attack line… when you lot quite literally just “joined with the Conservatives” in councils throughout the country. And don’t forget:
Your memory is short. The SNP went from 11 to 2 seats in 1979 when it last brought down a Labour government.
The SNP didn't just bring down a Labour government. The SNP joined with the Conservatives to bring down a Labour Government put Margaret Thatcher in power for 11 years.
I always thought it was the voters who put Thatcher in power, but I'm happy to be corrected if wrong.
It was the SNP that forced the General Election that gave the voters that opportunity. Thatcher may never have been PM if it wasn't for the SNP voting with the Conservatives to bring down the Labour government when they did.
The election had to be held by October, 5 months later. What do you think Labour would have done in those 5 months that would have bettered their standing with the voters?
If Labour had been allowed to hold the GE at a time of their own choosing they may have held on to power. As it was they were forced to have the GE in May 1979 which was a time that the SNP and the Conservative's chose. The Conservative won in 1979 with the help of the SNP. It's not convenient for the SNP to remember this now but it happened and you can't change history although the SNP would certainly try.
Respectfully, you've just waffled and ignored my question. There HAD to be an election by October 1979. Labour were in trouble with the electorate, as the actual result showed. What would they have done in the last five months to turn it around?
You claim it might have been better and it might have. It might have been worse, too. Voters don't like it when a government is holed below the waterline but limps on and on. Labour weren't governing well by this point and it's wishful thinking that they could have pulled a miracle out of the hat.
I think the poor performance of the SNP in 1979 was more to do with the flop of the 1978 referendum.
Callaghan would probably have won in 1978 with an autumn election. It was only after the collapse of his wage control policy that it all went wrong. Something that current politicians should ponder on.
I've just been watching the quiz show "Pointless". There was a round on politics where contestants were asked to name a member of the Cabinet following the 2021 reshuffle (The quiz was obviously filmed a few months back). One man said: "Isn't there someone called Rene Sunak?" From now on I shall think of Rishi with an apron and a tray of drinks serving in a French cafe.
BTW there was a appalling lack of knowledge. One contestant could only name Boris Johnson and another had to make up a name because she couldn't think of anyone.
Rene Sunak and the fallen Madonna with the big boobies?
Yes I noticed Boris has big boobies and also makes some
You were planning on voting for him at the next GE not so long ago!
“Extreme heat is taking its toll on Britain's electricity system. Demand is unusually high due to air con & fans, while solar & gas plants are less efficient...
National Grid has issued an alert calling for more power plants tonight and analysts say the situation looks serious 😬”
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
“Extreme heat is taking its toll on Britain's electricity system. Demand is unusually high due to air con & fans, while solar & gas plants are less efficient...
National Grid has issued an alert calling for more power plants tonight and analysts say the situation looks serious 😬”
And they said I was mad for having backup batteries... best investment ever imho.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Mordaunt would have been a total disaster.
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
“Extreme heat is taking its toll on Britain's electricity system. Demand is unusually high due to air con & fans, while solar & gas plants are less efficient...
National Grid has issued an alert calling for more power plants tonight and analysts say the situation looks serious 😬”
“Extreme heat is taking its toll on Britain's electricity system. Demand is unusually high due to air con & fans, while solar & gas plants are less efficient...
National Grid has issued an alert calling for more power plants tonight and analysts say the situation looks serious 😬”
As things stand I think Liz Truss is going to win.
I bloody hope so!
I'm hoping for a Rishi/Truss run-off to the membership as its then literally win/win.
Either win - my bet comes in, or win - the best candidate wins and we get the best candidate to be PM. Either way I'd be happy. 👍
Truss is the Fuck the Union candidate par excellence. She’s head and shoulders above the rest.
I think the SNP would have big problems if they joined with the Conservatives under Truss to undermine the operation of a Lab/LD coalition or Lab minority government with C&S and perhaps even bring it down. PM Truss would make that outcome more likely I think. So be careful what you wish for.
“Joined with the Conservatives”?!? Ho ho. That’s a tremendous Labour attack line… when you lot quite literally just “joined with the Conservatives” in councils throughout the country. And don’t forget:
Your memory is short. The SNP went from 11 to 2 seats in 1979 when it last brought down a Labour government.
Jim Callaghan himself said that that was a lot of nonsense.
"At an election rally in Glasgow at the start of the campaign, Callaghan attacked the SNP's role in joining with the Conservatives to bring his Government down. He described them as "turkeys voting for Christmas" and urged his Scottish supporters to "carve them up in the polling booths.""
That was when he was electioneering. He had a different and more considered view as do political historians - that it only speeded things up by a few months at most.
Labour had breached an agreement to allow a referendum without nobbling it. Simple as that.
In any case, why aren't you complaining about the LDs as well?
Or for that matter the Labour and SDLP MPs who abstained (one with an excellent excuse)?
Considering the collapse of the SNP vote at the following election, it does rather seem as if they were turkeys voting for Christmas and they did indeed get carved up in the pooling booths. Whoever and whatever was ultimately responsible for Callaghan's government really does not matter to be honest. What matters is that the last time the SNP 'helped' bring a Labour government down, their vote collapsed. Which is why Starmer - if we get a hung parliament next election - is not going to struggle to get a Queen's Speech through the Commons and will likely be able to govern for long enough to call another election on his terms.
"It was the SNP's fault we were so crap in 1979!"
In any case - it seems to have escaped attention that the situation is now radically different thanks to devolution. So many discussions on PB are fixated on the SNP in a Labour minority government situation - but, as I have pointed out several times, there is a prior problem: the likelihood (but not, it should be said, certainty) of a Tory majority in England.
Now, it has also largely escaped attention that Tories have carefully eliminated their flagship policy of literally the morning after indyref1 of EVEL. There are two possible explanations*. One is to make sure that Mr Gove could become Prime Minister even if he stood for, as he once memorably put it, the Scottish seat of Fraserhead and Peterborough. Does that seem likely? The other - well, you work it out.
*apart, of course, from the goodness of their collective heart.
Did that PBer end up going golfing? Is BartyBobbins still insisting the weather is “glorious”?
Absolutely glorious weather here. 😎🌞
Spent the last couple of hours with the kids in our blow up pool in the garden. 🏊♀️
Great weather you'd normally have to pay to fly to, but at home instead. Even the Moaning Myrtles seem to have briefly stopped moaning and started enjoying themselves.
Great new game, you should say. Daddy sits in the pool and you pour cold buckets of water over his head. 😎
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Bit like Sunak and his plans to deal with the Cost of Living Crisis he contributed to.
Further confirmation that Truss will not make it to the GE if she wins.
We know MPs don't want her - if MPs decided between the Final 2 then it's obvious Sunak would win by miles against either Truss or Mordaunt.
So if the members impose Truss on the MPs, after the Con poll rating inevitably goes down even further MPs will boot her out next summer, just in time for a new leader to have 9 months pre GE.
“Extreme heat is taking its toll on Britain's electricity system. Demand is unusually high due to air con & fans, while solar & gas plants are less efficient...
National Grid has issued an alert calling for more power plants tonight and analysts say the situation looks serious 😬”
I've just been watching the quiz show "Pointless". There was a round on politics where contestants were asked to name a member of the Cabinet following the 2021 reshuffle (The quiz was obviously filmed a few months back). One man said: "Isn't there someone called Rene Sunak?" From now on I shall think of Rishi with an apron and a tray of drinks serving in a French cafe.
BTW there was a appalling lack of knowledge. One contestant could only name Boris Johnson and another had to make up a name because she couldn't think of anyone.
Rene Sunak and the fallen Madonna with the big boobies?
Yes I noticed Boris has big boobies and also makes some
You were planning on voting for him at the next GE not so long ago!
Look, in my book, everyone is entitled to their own turn-on, OK? As long as we're talking consenting adults!
Admittedly BJ-boobyphilia is topic on which Freud, Jung AND Sacher-Madsoch would all have LOTS to talk about.
The TERF-led campaign against Penny has worked well, hasn't it?
It's a shame they're too thick to realise that they've sided with some people who will soon be going after them...
Radical Feminists in the Tory Party?
Er ...
Some in the Tory Party are the TERF's useful idiots.
Which is exactly the problem. The same sort of dinosaurs within the Conservative Party who spit their tea out at the thought of anyone being any different to them, whether in gender, race, sexuality or anything else, are the same sort who will be spitting their tea out at other things in the future. like same-sex marriage et al. As we are seeing in the US.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Yup ; as she mentioned in the debate, she was the only one amongst them who had been able to win a Labour seat. It's the communicative and relational abilities again. As I mentioned earlier, for this reason she's likely to be back again in 2024 or after, if Sunak wins and then fails.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Bit like Sunak and his plans to deal with the Cost of Living Crisis he contributed to.
I've got no doubt that Sunak simply offers more of the same. But, at least he'll deliver competent rational government,
The rest are worse.
And Starmer is no better. He'd be the same as Sunak, perhaps with a tad more tax & spend, but without the charisma.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Mordaunt would have been a total disaster.
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Those Truss figures are grim, or great depending on political perspective.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Bit like Sunak and his plans to deal with the Cost of Living Crisis he contributed to.
I've got no doubt that Sunak simply offers more of the same. But, at least he'll deliver competent rational government,
The rest are worse.
And Starmer is no better. He'd be the same as Sunak, perhaps with a tad more tax & spend, but without the charisma.
What is competent or rationale about his tax and spend record as Chancellor? Or his planned counter cyclical austerity he kept bragging about on tv last night? Roll the dice I say. I don’t care who, anyone but him please Tory Party.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Mordaunt would have been a total disaster.
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Those Truss figures are grim, or great depending on political perspective.
LICIPM
All three are in the same ballpark so I don't think you can infer anything about their chances in a GE from those numbers.
Highest temperature I have clocked is 37.5 at Rugeley Trent Valley. But it still feels pretty warm here.
I have a mid-sized inflatable pool out in the garden. Yesterday the little 'uns best friends came round for a splash for three hours. Today, we invited a random kid from the school over. By the time school had ended the pool was shaded, meaning it was ideal. Ice lollies, splashing, and a liberal soaking at random intervals from the hose.
So much fun. Happy days.
Although looking at the turbidity of the water, I'm unsure it'll last until tomorrow afternoon...
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Bit like Sunak and his plans to deal with the Cost of Living Crisis he contributed to.
I've got no doubt that Sunak simply offers more of the same. But, at least he'll deliver competent rational government,
The rest are worse.
And Starmer is no better. He'd be the same as Sunak, perhaps with a tad more tax & spend, but without the charisma.
Increasing NI and putting taxes up to a 74 year high is neither competent nor rational.
It’s tedious waiting until 8pm for the result today. Get on with it!
As for fertiliser and CO2, can Robert enlighten us on what Californian startup is going to become the Apple/Tesla/Google of food? Surely there’s mahoosive scope for highly energy and resource efficient vertical farming, closed loop even. Plenty experimenting with it, who’s going to be the trillion dollar company because of it? Because someone will.
The last time I looked vertical farming was one to two orders of magnitude less efficient in produce per investment.
Eventually, but nowhere near yet.
It’s great in my part of the world, where there’s not a lot of farmland relative to the population - but anywhere with thousands of square miles of existing farmland, not so much. Yet.
I feel like whoever wins is going to have large chunks of the parliamentary party looking for an opportunity to stab them in the back from day 1.
It does have shades of 2001 about it... three candidates in the final round, all with obvious flaws, all getting roughly a third of the electorate. Someone and their backers are going to be really narked at not making the membership vote.
The announcement comes after two unrelated patients from the southern Ashanti region of Ghana, both of whom later died, tested positive for the virus.
The patients had shown symptoms including diarrhea, fever, nausea, and vomiting, WHO said, adding that more than 90 contacts are being monitored.
Marburg is a highly infectious viral hemorrhagic fever in the same family as the better known Ebola virus disease and has a fatality ratio of up to 88%, according to WHO.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Mordaunt would have been a total disaster.
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Those Truss figures are grim, or great depending on political perspective.
LICIPM
All three are in the same ballpark so I don't think you can infer anything about their chances in a GE from those numbers.
Certainly none provides evidence of a strong revival, but only Truss makes the Tory chances worse than at present.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Bit like Sunak and his plans to deal with the Cost of Living Crisis he contributed to.
I've got no doubt that Sunak simply offers more of the same. But, at least he'll deliver competent rational government,
The rest are worse.
And Starmer is no better. He'd be the same as Sunak, perhaps with a tad more tax & spend, but without the charisma.
What is competent or rationale about his tax and spend record as Chancellor? Or his planned counter cyclical austerity he kept bragging about on tv last night? Roll the dice I say. I don’t care who, anyone but him please Tory Party.
He will balance the books and prevent a run on the pound, which Liz Truss wouldn't it.
He'll clearly throw any spare cash he gets at the NHS and Pensions, just like any Tory PM, and has little political imagination, but aside from Kemi there is no alternative.
“Extreme heat is taking its toll on Britain's electricity system. Demand is unusually high due to air con & fans, while solar & gas plants are less efficient...
National Grid has issued an alert calling for more power plants tonight and analysts say the situation looks serious 😬”
Solar plants are “less efficient”. Eh?
Basically: the higher the temperature goes from the optimal temperature for the solar panel, the less its efficiency. It may be getting more sunlight, but it will be less efficiently be converting the photons into electricity than if it was nearer that optimum temperature.
The Government big hitters must be keeping their powder dry for later, since those defending the government now are a ragbag off mostly obscure backbenchers.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Mordaunt would have been a total disaster.
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Mordaunt to take a dive or Mordaunt to make a splash?
Fucking woke governments! How dare they assist deviant, foreign rodents display their trans(national) genitals in pure English habitats?
Beavers to be legally protected from harm in England from October
Under new legislation, it will be an offence to deliberately capture, kill, disturb or injure beavers in England or damage where the animals breed and rest
A five-year government trial on the river Otter in south-west England concluded that beavers had brought “a wealth of benefits to the local area and ecology”.
Am I the only person on this site who, book-value aside, thinks that Truss is the best candidate?
Almost everyone else on this site seems to be anti-Truss for one reason or another it seems.
My personal order of preference: Badenoch Truss Tugendhat Sunak Mourdaunt
My personal preference: Mordaunt Tugendhat Badenoch Sunak Truss
Truss is out of the running for the way she abandoned her job at the G20 to come back to the UK for her own benefit. We've had enough of that sort of rubbish from Johnson, thankyou very much. Sunak is too tied to the Johnson regime to be able to create his own identity, I think. Tugendhat would be a Major-style figure. Badenoch would, at least, be interesting.
Any of them might grow into the role. Or be a disaster.
Did that PBer end up going golfing? Is BartyBobbins still insisting the weather is “glorious”?
Absolutely glorious weather here. 😎🌞
Spent the last couple of hours with the kids in our blow up pool in the garden. 🏊♀️
Great weather you'd normally have to pay to fly to, but at home instead. Even the Moaning Myrtles seem to have briefly stopped moaning and started enjoying themselves.
Out of curiosity, just how hot is it at your coordinates, outdoors & inside?
Certain sounds like a good day for a splash. BTW, here in the States, lawn sprinklers are VERY popular with the younger generation during dog days of summer.
Last hot spell we had in Seattle last month I when out & about I observed with great pleasure local kiddies enjoying the large kiddie pool at Green Lake city park.
Years ago a newly-elected (and one-term) mayor dealt with short-term budget crunch one summer by CLOSING the city's kiddie pools. Swore I'd never vote for the SOB, and kept my promise. And will in future, unless he's running against 45 or suchlike trash.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Mordaunt would have been a total disaster.
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Mordaunt to take a dive or Mordaunt to make a splash?
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Bit like Sunak and his plans to deal with the Cost of Living Crisis he contributed to.
I've got no doubt that Sunak simply offers more of the same. But, at least he'll deliver competent rational government,
The rest are worse.
And Starmer is no better. He'd be the same as Sunak, perhaps with a tad more tax & spend, but without the charisma.
What is competent or rationale about his tax and spend record as Chancellor? Or his planned counter cyclical austerity he kept bragging about on tv last night? Roll the dice I say. I don’t care who, anyone but him please Tory Party.
He will balance the books and prevent a run on the pound, which Liz Truss wouldn't it.
He'll clearly throw any spare cash he gets at the NHS and Pensions, just like any Tory PM, and has little political imagination, but aside from Kemi there is no alternative.
Osborne very nearly had a disaster in 2012-13 espousing the same counter-cyclical policy that moonshine mentions, until he changed course, so I'm not too confident of his economic policy if he actually goes through with it to the caricatured "don't the max out the credit card", rhetorical and over-simplified extent. He seems a reasonably competent manager in other areas, though, and quite strategic.
Nevertheless, he seems quite heavily ideological beneath the fluid and sunny charm, to me, which is why I don't necessarily think the country would be safer with him than Mordaunt overall.
When either of them is compared to Liz Truss, however .... well.
Fucking woke governments! How dare they assist deviant, foreign rodents display their trans(national) genitals in pure English habitats?
Beavers to be legally protected from harm in England from October
Under new legislation, it will be an offence to deliberately capture, kill, disturb or injure beavers in England or damage where the animals breed and rest
A five-year government trial on the river Otter in south-west England concluded that beavers had brought “a wealth of benefits to the local area and ecology”.
Has anybody worked out why the government called this stupid VONC in itself?
Bizarrely as frightened of Labour saying they hadn’t been allowed a vote at all as they were about having one that forced them to vote on a motion that actually named the PM.
Am I the only person on this site who, book-value aside, thinks that Truss is the best candidate?
Almost everyone else on this site seems to be anti-Truss for one reason or another it seems.
My personal order of preference: Badenoch Truss Tugendhat Sunak Mourdaunt
My personal preference: Mordaunt Tugendhat Badenoch Sunak Truss
Truss is out of the running for the way she abandoned her job at the G20 to come back to the UK for her own benefit. We've had enough of that sort of rubbish from Johnson, thankyou very much. Sunak is too tied to the Johnson regime to be able to create his own identity, I think. Tugendhat would be a Major-style figure. Badenoch would, at least, be interesting.
Any of them might grow into the role. Or be a disaster.
I don't think we can blame her for that.
Had she not done so she'd have been totally out of the running.
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
P Bullocks
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
Yep, none of them have been able to demonstrate that they’ll be a gamechanger. Interesting that Mordaunt does the best, who they’ve comprehensively trashed and destroyed in order to get Rishi or Liz in Number 10…
Advantage Labour…
Mordaunt would have been a total disaster.
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
Mordaunt to take a dive or Mordaunt to make a splash?
Did PM4PM star in this classic vid? (At a very tender age!)
And IF she makes it to the top, what are odds that Trump will volunteer to campaign for her? Hopefully for her sake in Hot Coffee, Mississippi NOT in Crackpot, North Yorkshire.
We're getting rid of Cash. He'll soon be Sir Bill Contactless and we won't have to worry about him.
If Chris Pincher had been contactless, none of this would be happening.
A rum affair, for sure. Also wine, whisky, whiskey, lager, porter,stout,gin, vodka, slivovitz, sake, etc., etc.
And 20-year-old aged-in-the-boiler Everclear 90-proof American crazy water?
Mm, weather like this reminds me of visiting Seattle for a conference and discovering that those particular Americans actually did have decent beer from the microbreweries (this was c. 1994).
Voters are cast. A long hour now whilst the 1922 count & verify them.
Well, it's not surprising it's such a slow process. It's going to take 38 of them, unless one of them is a freak with more than ten digits a la Anne Boleyn (allegedly).
“Extreme heat is taking its toll on Britain's electricity system. Demand is unusually high due to air con & fans, while solar & gas plants are less efficient...
National Grid has issued an alert calling for more power plants tonight and analysts say the situation looks serious 😬”
Solar plants are “less efficient”. Eh?
As it gets hotter, yes. Not a huge effect overall, though, since solar is only a small proportion of total UK generating capacity.
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
P Bullocks
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
Not for the cows, it's not
Bullocks
Nice try, have you heifer considered a career in standup?
Did that PBer end up going golfing? Is BartyBobbins still insisting the weather is “glorious”?
Absolutely glorious weather here. 😎🌞
Spent the last couple of hours with the kids in our blow up pool in the garden. 🏊♀️
Great weather you'd normally have to pay to fly to, but at home instead. Even the Moaning Myrtles seem to have briefly stopped moaning and started enjoying themselves.
Great new game, you should say. Daddy sits in the pool and you pour cold buckets of water over his head. 😎
Too much risk of the tykes getting a weeeeeeee bit carried away.
Perhaps by fetching a fire hose to REALLY cool daddy down. Not a bad idea, actually!
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
P Bullocks
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
Not for the cows, it's not
Bullocks
Nice try, have you heifer considered a career in standup?
A stirk and exposed position, though, up on the stage.
Has anybody worked out why the government called this stupid VONC in itself?
Because Bozo is a clown?
Harsh. On clowns.
I think he wants to be able to say that he was never voted down in the actual Commons. It was back stabbing plotters like Sunak who brought him down and so the myth of the 'stab in the back' can begin and the cultists like Mogg can sit late into the night nursing their whiskey and muttering about the lost king over the water.
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
P Bullocks
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
Not for the cows, it's not
Bullocks
Nice try, have you heifer considered a career in standup?
Am I the only person on this site who, book-value aside, thinks that Truss is the best candidate?
Almost everyone else on this site seems to be anti-Truss for one reason or another it seems.
My personal order of preference: Badenoch Truss Tugendhat Sunak Mourdaunt
My personal preference: Mordaunt Tugendhat Badenoch Sunak Truss
Truss is out of the running for the way she abandoned her job at the G20 to come back to the UK for her own benefit. We've had enough of that sort of rubbish from Johnson, thankyou very much. Sunak is too tied to the Johnson regime to be able to create his own identity, I think. Tugendhat would be a Major-style figure. Badenoch would, at least, be interesting.
Any of them might grow into the role. Or be a disaster.
I don't think we can blame her for that.
Had she not done so she'd have been totally out of the running.
Yes we can. It was her job. She was the boss, going over to meet people and arrange things. It's bad luck for her that the job became available at that time, but she abandoned what she should have been doing just for her own ambitions. What else will she abandon for her ambition? After Johnson, that is not the sort of person we want.
If she wins, how can she send any of her ministers out on these jollies?
Has anybody worked out why the government called this stupid VONC in itself?
Because Bozo is a clown?
Harsh. On clowns.
I think he wants to be able to say that he was never voted down in the actual Commons. It was back stabbing plotters like Sunak who brought him down and so the myth of the 'stab in the back' can begin and the cultists like Mogg can sit late into the night nursing their whiskey and muttering about the lost king over the water.
Not to mention the lost lands of Ireland, I see.
But thanks - I was just trying to make sense of it too!
Fucking woke governments! How dare they assist deviant, foreign rodents display their trans(national) genitals in pure English habitats?
Beavers to be legally protected from harm in England from October
Under new legislation, it will be an offence to deliberately capture, kill, disturb or injure beavers in England or damage where the animals breed and rest
A five-year government trial on the river Otter in south-west England concluded that beavers had brought “a wealth of benefits to the local area and ecology”.
Am I the only person on this site who, book-value aside, thinks that Truss is the best candidate?
Almost everyone else on this site seems to be anti-Truss for one reason or another it seems.
My personal order of preference: Badenoch Truss Tugendhat Sunak Mourdaunt
My personal preference: Mordaunt Tugendhat Badenoch Sunak Truss
Truss is out of the running for the way she abandoned her job at the G20 to come back to the UK for her own benefit. We've had enough of that sort of rubbish from Johnson, thankyou very much. Sunak is too tied to the Johnson regime to be able to create his own identity, I think. Tugendhat would be a Major-style figure. Badenoch would, at least, be interesting.
Any of them might grow into the role. Or be a disaster.
I don't think we can blame her for that.
Had she not done so she'd have been totally out of the running.
Yes we can. It was her job. She was the boss, going over to meet people and arrange things. It's bad luck for her that the job became available at that time, but she abandoned what she should have been doing just for her own ambitions. What else will she abandon for her ambition? After Johnson, that is not the sort of person we want.
If she wins, how can she send any of her ministers out on these jollies?
Look at Mr Wallace - getting on with the job. And he was in London all along.
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
P Bullocks
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
Not for the cows, it's not
Bullocks
Nice try, have you heifer considered a career in standup?
A stirk and exposed position, though, up on the stage.
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
P Bullocks
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
Not for the cows, it's not
Bullocks
Nice try, have you heifer considered a career in standup?
You've had your fun, now move along, little doggie!
My favorite Gary Larson cartoon: Cows and Great Chicago Fire
- be sceptical of economists/pundits who explain inflation as a consequence of wages/prices. Data doesn’t really support this explanation. - Inflation (US) is probably spiking right now/soon and should come down. -Main cause is supply shocks which are easing.
As things stand I think Liz Truss is going to win.
I bloody hope so!
I'm hoping for a Rishi/Truss run-off to the membership as its then literally win/win.
Either win - my bet comes in, or win - the best candidate wins and we get the best candidate to be PM. Either way I'd be happy. 👍
Truss is the Fuck the Union candidate par excellence. She’s head and shoulders above the rest.
I think the SNP would have big problems if they joined with the Conservatives under Truss to undermine the operation of a Lab/LD coalition or Lab minority government with C&S and perhaps even bring it down. PM Truss would make that outcome more likely I think. So be careful what you wish for.
“Joined with the Conservatives”?!? Ho ho. That’s a tremendous Labour attack line… when you lot quite literally just “joined with the Conservatives” in councils throughout the country. And don’t forget:
Your memory is short. The SNP went from 11 to 2 seats in 1979 when it last brought down a Labour government.
Jim Callaghan himself said that that was a lot of nonsense.
"At an election rally in Glasgow at the start of the campaign, Callaghan attacked the SNP's role in joining with the Conservatives to bring his Government down. He described them as "turkeys voting for Christmas" and urged his Scottish supporters to "carve them up in the polling booths.""
That was when he was electioneering. He had a different and more considered view as do political historians - that it only speeded things up by a few months at most.
Labour had breached an agreement to allow a referendum without nobbling it. Simple as that.
In any case, why aren't you complaining about the LDs as well?
Or for that matter the Labour and SDLP MPs who abstained (one with an excellent excuse)?
Considering the collapse of the SNP vote at the following election, it does rather seem as if they were turkeys voting for Christmas and they did indeed get carved up in the pooling booths. Whoever and whatever was ultimately responsible for Callaghan's government really does not matter to be honest. What matters is that the last time the SNP 'helped' bring a Labour government down, their vote collapsed. Which is why Starmer - if we get a hung parliament next election - is not going to struggle to get a Queen's Speech through the Commons and will likely be able to govern for long enough to call another election on his terms.
EDIT: Forgot to add the word 'collapsing' after government. Wish you could actually edit your post after six minutes.
How on earth did the British Empire conquer all those hot countries?
Solar topees and linen spine-pads. Don't know how I'd have got on today without mine
Demand genuine pith helmet, with genuine (or good imitation) pith.
Works great in hot, esp dry weather PROVIDE you keep it wet, preferably with coldest water available. PROVIDED you have the personal confidence & chutzpah to wear it in public!
Am I the only person on this site who, book-value aside, thinks that Truss is the best candidate?
Almost everyone else on this site seems to be anti-Truss for one reason or another it seems.
She seems serious, passionate and capable. I think you should back her to the hilt.
From a Labour perspective she looks suitable. The public persona and charisma of T May + a harsh set of principles and without the solidity and correctness. I think Labourites are looking at a further period in opposition if Kemi gets it, otherwise they should be reasonably confident. Truss would be the Labour favourite though, as there is something to be said for all then others.
Truss is probably better than Rishi for a host of reasons. Chief among them not having to take ownership for the economic situation.
His stature will also be an issue on TV.
The real question is whether Kemi would really broaden or sustain the party's reach.
I'm not sure she will appeal to UKIP leaning former Labour voters in the Red Wall - or to Remain leaning Wets down south.
She is articulate, attractive and sharp. I'm just not sure she is the answer to the fragmenting electoral coalition that the next leader will need to address.
I don't think there is a large Black middle class vote that will flip if she runs - unlike the sizeable Hindu vote which is already moving into the Tory column.
And she has personal weaknesses - I think she will look too ideological. She doesn't have personal gravitas - although she might develop that in time.
My gut feeling is that she doesn't come across well on "women's issues" - health, transport, education etc - which is where the current Tory party is getting crucified among female swing voters. (Hillary Clinton had the same problem - she really loved the big picture economic and geopolitical strategy - and that was ultimately reflected in voter perceptions).
It is remarkable how little attention the Tories have paid to these issues. Housing has only belatedly got onto the agenda because it is biting young activists.
So the idea that a black female leader would close off the race and gender angle evaporates under closer scrutiny.
And if she did win pretty soon she would get dragged down into the sorry horse trading that running the country involves.
Selling personal sacrifices to the electorate while cutting corporate taxation is going to be a tough message.
I think she is really cementing her position as a strong challenger for leader in 2025 if the election is lost.
I don't think the fact that she's black would affect things much - people who vote purely on race are really rare now. She's interesting and lucid and although she's right-wing she does'nt have the air of a head-banger who never listens - witness her firm commitment to net zero. I'm not going to vote Tory if she's leader, but I know people who might, and really wouldn't for the others. Essentially she fits the "time for a change " narrative - Sunak and Truss are not a change, and Mordaunt hasn't succeeded in establishing a USP.
Tonight's ballot won't change much, But I suspect tomorrow's ballot is going to be all about Truss vs Badenoch, with Mordaunt trailing.
Voters are cast. A long hour now whilst the 1922 count & verify them.
Well, it's not surprising it's such a slow process. It's going to take 38 of them, unless one of them is a freak with more than ten digits a la Anne Boleyn (allegedly).
IIRC Sri Lanka didn’t run out of currency - they chose to ban fertiliser for their own reasons (albeit mad ones) failing to realise that the existing cash export crops were dependent on fertiliser imports & there wasn’t enough domestically produced fertiliser (regardless of source) to make up the difference. So exports fell more than imports & triggered a currency / balance of payments crisis.
There was an excellent bbc world service programme on this last night;
“The Climate Question: Can we feed the world without using chemical fertilisers?”
TBH, I usually skip over these climate programmes because they tend to be rather boring. But the title of this one piqued my interest.
Anyway;
Short answer is: No. The world can probably feed about 4bn people. But long term, chemical fertilisers are a big climate problem because methane is such a destructive greenhouse gas.
Innovative solutions required.
Farm kangaroos instead of cows. Produce much less methane.
Milking them is a bit of a faff, though.
No animal is created/evolved not to digest its food properly. The cows are fed shite, that's why they fart/burp. Do the same to Kangaroos; you'd get the same outcome.
No, it is because cows ferment cellulose to break it down into digestible form, methane is a byproduct.
Oh, right you are - I retract the above. It seems that claims of lower carbon footprint rest on 'soil carbon sequestration', rather thsn healthier no belchy cows.
P Bullocks
Grass fed beef is much healthier though of course.
Not for the cows, it's not
Bullocks
Nice try, have you heifer considered a career in standup?
A stirk and exposed position, though, up on the stage.
The British Empire built the Cairo to Khartoum railway, how on did they manage that but rail tracks in this country cannot cope with the heat?
The Khartoum line didn't have to cope with snow and ice in the winter. It's hot all the time in Egypt/Sudan? So no need to worry about the line shrinking in winter if it is given too much room for expansion.
Also - not continuous welded rail, so more play - just send a few dozen chaps with spanners to redo the fishplates every few weeks?
That is riveting. Also a great relief, because after posting that I decided that there was a 30% chance that spine pads were something I had just dreamt.
Fucking woke governments! How dare they assist deviant, foreign rodents display their trans(national) genitals in pure English habitats?
Beavers to be legally protected from harm in England from October
Under new legislation, it will be an offence to deliberately capture, kill, disturb or injure beavers in England or damage where the animals breed and rest
A five-year government trial on the river Otter in south-west England concluded that beavers had brought “a wealth of benefits to the local area and ecology”.
I hope everybody took Raab advice to keep cool by heading to lie on the beach....
Off to the seaside tomorrow*
It was 37 degrees a few minutes ago.
I actually had to unpeel myself from my office chair.
Will somebody please sacrifice a virgin to the Gods so they can change the weather.
*I wish
I've persuaded Mrs J not to drive into work tomorrow, 50 mins there, 50 mins back. Although it's scorchio in our study, it's better than being in a car for 100-120 minutes in this heat.
Comments
Advantage Labour…
Callaghan would probably have won in 1978 with an autumn election. It was only after the collapse of his wage control policy that it all went wrong. Something that current politicians should ponder on.
Wait til winter and there's not enough gas...
She looks nice and relatable, but there's nothing there. Nothing.
In any case - it seems to have escaped attention that the situation is now radically different thanks to devolution. So many discussions on PB are fixated on the SNP in a Labour minority government situation - but, as I have pointed out several times, there is a prior problem: the likelihood (but not, it should be said, certainty) of a Tory majority in England.
Now, it has also largely escaped attention that Tories have carefully eliminated their flagship policy of literally the morning after indyref1 of EVEL. There are two possible explanations*. One is to make sure that Mr Gove could become Prime Minister even if he stood for, as he once memorably put it, the Scottish seat of Fraserhead and Peterborough. Does that seem likely? The other - well, you work it out.
*apart, of course, from the goodness of their collective heart.
Highest temperature I have clocked is 37.5 at Rugeley Trent Valley. But it still feels pretty warm here.
We know MPs don't want her - if MPs decided between the Final 2 then it's obvious Sunak would win by miles against either Truss or Mordaunt.
So if the members impose Truss on the MPs, after the Con poll rating inevitably goes down even further MPs will boot her out next summer, just in time for a new leader to have 9 months pre GE.
Admittedly BJ-boobyphilia is topic on which Freud, Jung AND Sacher-Madsoch would all have LOTS to talk about.
Which is exactly the problem. The same sort of dinosaurs within the Conservative Party who spit their tea out at the thought of anyone being any different to them, whether in gender, race, sexuality or anything else, are the same sort who will be spitting their tea out at other things in the future. like same-sex marriage et al. As we are seeing in the US.
They really are dinosaurs.
The rest are worse.
And Starmer is no better. He'd be the same as Sunak, perhaps with a tad more tax & spend, but without the charisma.
LICIPM
Can people like this not be made illegal?
So much fun. Happy days.
Although looking at the turbidity of the water, I'm unsure it'll last until tomorrow afternoon...
The announcement comes after two unrelated patients from the southern Ashanti region of Ghana, both of whom later died, tested positive for the virus.
The patients had shown symptoms including diarrhea, fever, nausea, and vomiting, WHO said, adding that more than 90 contacts are being monitored.
Marburg is a highly infectious viral hemorrhagic fever in the same family as the better known Ebola virus disease and has a fatality ratio of up to 88%, according to WHO.
He'll clearly throw any spare cash he gets at the NHS and Pensions, just like any Tory PM, and has little political imagination, but aside from Kemi there is no alternative.
Badenoch
Truss
Tugendhat
Sunak
Mourdaunt
https://captaingreen.com.au/optimal-temperature-for-solar-panels/
Mordaunt to make a splash?
Mordaunt
Tugendhat
Badenoch
Sunak
Truss
Truss is out of the running for the way she abandoned her job at the G20 to come back to the UK for her own benefit. We've had enough of that sort of rubbish from Johnson, thankyou very much.
Sunak is too tied to the Johnson regime to be able to create his own identity, I think.
Tugendhat would be a Major-style figure.
Badenoch would, at least, be interesting.
Any of them might grow into the role. Or be a disaster.
Certain sounds like a good day for a splash. BTW, here in the States, lawn sprinklers are VERY popular with the younger generation during dog days of summer.
Last hot spell we had in Seattle last month I when out & about I observed with great pleasure local kiddies enjoying the large kiddie pool at Green Lake city park.
Years ago a newly-elected (and one-term) mayor dealt with short-term budget crunch one summer by CLOSING the city's kiddie pools. Swore I'd never vote for the SOB, and kept my promise. And will in future, unless he's running against 45 or suchlike trash.
Nevertheless, he seems quite heavily ideological beneath the fluid and sunny charm, to me, which is why I don't necessarily think the country would be safer with him than Mordaunt overall.
When either of them is compared to Liz Truss, however .... well.
And 20-year-old aged-in-the-boiler Everclear 90-proof American crazy water?
Had she not done so she'd have been totally out of the running.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqAOj6pLoA4
Did PM4PM star in this classic vid? (At a very tender age!)
And IF she makes it to the top, what are odds that Trump will volunteer to campaign for her? Hopefully for her sake in Hot Coffee, Mississippi NOT in Crackpot, North Yorkshire.
Not a huge effect overall, though, since solar is only a small proportion of total UK generating capacity.
Perhaps by fetching a fire hose to REALLY cool daddy down. Not a bad idea, actually!
As they say Down South - go soak yer head!
It was 37 degrees a few minutes ago.
I actually had to unpeel myself from my office chair.
Will somebody please sacrifice a virgin to the Gods so they can change the weather.
*I wish
If she wins, how can she send any of her ministers out on these jollies?
But thanks - I was just trying to make sense of it too!
https://twitter.com/Frknwar/status/1549084445164158977
My favorite Gary Larson cartoon: Cows and Great Chicago Fire
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/47/8e/d8/478ed8149f39419110a379386558ee18.jpg
“Inflation: a guide for the perplexed”
https://pca.st/tvortocc
Worth an hour of anyones time, imo.
Takeaways
- be sceptical of economists/pundits who explain inflation as a consequence of wages/prices. Data doesn’t really support this explanation.
- Inflation (US) is probably spiking right now/soon and should come down.
-Main cause is supply shocks which are easing.
https://militaryhealth.bmj.com/content/jramc/102/4/217.full.pdf
Works great in hot, esp dry weather PROVIDE you keep it wet, preferably with coldest water available. PROVIDED you have the personal confidence & chutzpah to wear it in public!
Tonight's ballot won't change much, But I suspect tomorrow's ballot is going to be all about Truss vs Badenoch, with Mordaunt trailing.
If he really did, then he get in the fucking sea.
Also - not continuous welded rail, so more play - just send a few dozen chaps with spanners to redo the fishplates every few weeks?
After using the CEN hustings to publicly back the Net Zero by 2050 target, Kemi Badenoch now says she COULD delay it, telling @TalkTV
"Yes there are circumstances where I would delay it... setting a target is not delivering."
https://twitter.com/NatashaC/status/1549096711271768069
Only the gullible fall for her words.
https://www.johnlewis.com/herman-miller-aeron-office-chair-onyx/p6201703