No it isn't now. The SDs will be the largest party supporting the new government and even the BBC has pointed out Akesson now wants to be part of the new government, if not he could collapse it.
Akesson is now the Kingmaker whether you like it or not
Yes and no. The SD would like to be in Government, but there isn't a majority for that, since the other parties - the Liberals with particular emphasis - have declined to accept it. So they will bid for it, and when rejected will say "Well, in that case you must make the following major policy concessions."
The strength of their position is that an alternative government is impossible without their support. The weakness is that they cannot block it or bring it down without proving that they are unreliable partners, unserious about having a non-Social Democrat government - which would lose a lot of their new-found support. It's a high-stakes game, but one that will not lead to the SD in Government this time round.
Every so often I check the financial news, and my preferred site for doing so is Yahoo finance, for the sole reason that I always have done and it's laid out how I expect. It does, however, have a natty line in trying to make spurious connections - 'financial news x, as news event y'. There is a classic of the genre there today: "FTSE 100 rises as Queen Elizabeth II's coffin to lie in state in Edinburgh"
"DAX Futures hit all-time high, as McCartney announces tour dates."
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
SHE was naked under a see through dress. Do you want to get cancelled?
I am not going to be bullied into telling a lie. If a man can be free to say that he is a woman, then I am equally free to say that he isn't.
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
From an article on the protest:
"The activist, speaking to VICE on the condition of anonymity, described the dramatic action as “an extreme version of the public embarrassment that trans people experience on a daily basis, using the toilet that either doesn't fit with their gender or using the one that does, and then facing the backlash of people's judgement”."
Bollocks. Frankly. This is extreme narcissism on stilts. No consideration whatsoever about whether women want to share toilets with men pissing all over the place or men getting aroused while wearing women's clothes.
Is it illegal to use the "wrong" toilets? I mean, if I use a cubicle in women's loo have I broken the law?
I think not. In which case the trans person can use whichever toilet they want can't they?
Personally, I don't care (who looks at other people in these places anyway?) but I understand that some people do. Can't see it's a big issue to be honest.
Several religions (Judaism, Islam, to mention but two) have severe structures on women being in the presence of men. But their rights are to be ignored because of a few people’s feelings. See the Hampstead Ponds.
Every so often I check the financial news, and my preferred site for doing so is Yahoo finance, for the sole reason that I always have done and it's laid out how I expect. It does, however, have a natty line in trying to make spurious connections - 'financial news x, as news event y'. There is a classic of the genre there today: "FTSE 100 rises as Queen Elizabeth II's coffin to lie in state in Edinburgh"
Brighton Buses had an unfortunate Dot Matrix conjunction on one of their buses “Queen Elizabeth II 1926-2022” with “Not in Service”.
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
He reminds me a little of Gower, at least on the occasions he hits the ball. He has the same tall, languid elegance. And he is also prone to severe carelessness.
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
SHE was naked under a see through dress. Do you want to get cancelled?
I am not going to be bullied into telling a lie. If a man can be free to say that he is a woman, then I am equally free to say that he isn't.
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
From an article on the protest:
"The activist, speaking to VICE on the condition of anonymity, described the dramatic action as “an extreme version of the public embarrassment that trans people experience on a daily basis, using the toilet that either doesn't fit with their gender or using the one that does, and then facing the backlash of people's judgement”."
Bollocks. Frankly. This is extreme narcissism on stilts. No consideration whatsoever about whether women want to share toilets with men pissing all over the place or men getting aroused while wearing women's clothes.
Is it illegal to use the "wrong" toilets? I mean, if I use a cubicle in women's loo have I broken the law?
I think not. In which case the trans person can use whichever toilet they want can't they?
Personally, I don't care (who looks at other people in these places anyway?) but I understand that some people do. Can't see it's a big issue to be honest.
Several religions (Judaism, Islam, to mention but two) have severe structures on women being in the presence of men. But their rights are to be ignored because of a few people’s feelings. See the Hampstead Ponds.
good thing too
That these womens rights are to be ignored because some men believe they are women?
Reading the forecasts of numbers expected in London over the next week, I do hope the travel network holds up…. Yesterday afternoon the ECML ground to a halt due to signalling problems around Peterborough… passengers heading to Leeds, York and Hull were advised to get to SPI and take the single, un-cancelled service to Doncaster and find their way from there…. Ended up collecting P Junior from Warrington and driving him to the East Riding… five hour round trip…
Reading the forecasts of numbers expected in London over the next week, I do hope the travel network holds up…. Yesterday afternoon the ECML ground to a halt due to signalling problems around Peterborough… passengers heading to Leeds, York and Hull were advised to get to SIP and take the single, un-cancelled service to Doncaster and find their way from there…. Ended up collecting P Junior from Warrington and driving him to the East Riding… five hour round trip…
Yep - the usual reroute if Peterborough has problems is to use the WCML but that isn't that practical at the moment given the mess they've made of it...
Reading the forecasts of numbers expected in London over the next week, I do hope the travel network holds up…. Yesterday afternoon the ECML ground to a halt due to signalling problems around Peterborough… passengers heading to Leeds, York and Hull were advised to get to SIP and take the single, un-cancelled service to Doncaster and find their way from there…. Ended up collecting P Junior from Warrington and driving him to the East Riding… five hour round trip…
Yep - the usual reroute if Peterborough has problems is to use the WCML but that isn't that practical at the moment given the mess they've made of it...
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
He reminds me a little of Gower, at least on the occasions he hits the ball. He has the same tall, languid elegance. And he is also prone to severe carelessness.
Zak Crawley is a middle order batsman trying to play as an opener - with very similar results to what would have happened had Gower tried it. To his credit, he is trying to rein in his flashier instincts during the first ten overs, with some success. And he is doing no worse than many of the specialist openers who England have tried since Cook/Strauss. He is the Joe Cole of the England cricket team - talented player gamefully playing out of position due to lack of obvious candidates in that position and too many candidates in his favoured position.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
Gas futures peaked at 702p/therm. They are now at 365 and the trend is down.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
Gas futures peaked at 702p/therm. They are now at 365 and the trend is down.
I brought up the possibility of deflation a couple of weeks ago, was laughed at by some at the time.
Once the spike up rolls out of the data, some funny things can happen, some technical deflation is absolutely possible in the years ahead.
It is quite amusing to see the Sweden Democrats branded in these articles as 'far right'. One day the 'far right' will actually come on the scene and make parties like the Sweden Democrats look like Nick Clegg circa 2010.
It does seem to me, looking at the changes that have taken place in Sweden through mass immigration and the failure of elements of multiculturalism, that there would inevitably be this type of political reaction.
The real question, for those genuinely concerned about the 'far right', is whether or not the Sweden Democracts and their likely partners can make any real progress at dealing with the situation that has emerged.
Hmm.
"At the height of the campaign, the SD billed a metro train decorated in its electoral colours as the “repatriation express”. “Welcome aboard with a one-way ticket. Next stop, Kabul,” tweeted the party’s legal spokesperson, highlighting the SD’s demand to remove non-European immigrants."
How different is all this to Theresa May's "go home or face arrest" vans circa 2012/2013? It just seems to me like it is all the same thing. I don't think that the Sweden Democrats have any actual, real policy of repatriating lawful immigrants, they are trying to deal with illegal immigration and abuses in the system. You may not like this which is fair enough. But you have to ask yourself the question, is it better for these concerns to be advanced through the democratic system, or in some other way? I don't really know Sweden well enough to say how I would vote, but it seems like there are lots of problems arising from mass immigration, including gun crime, which the liberal system is not dealing particularly well with.
Indeed.
The “liberal system”, as you describe it, has indeed failed regarding law & order and regarding integration. We all know that. It is rarely publicly acknowledged, but The Establishment in Sweden (which is all the parties excluding V and SD) have fucked up. Big time. We are going to fix it.
Which particular party are you identifying yourself with here, or do you mean the rightwing coalition as a whole ?
Hate to repeat myself for the umpteenth time, but there is no “rightwing coalition”.
I am identifying myself with mainstream Sweden, with ‘The Establishment’: S+M+C+KD+MP+L. We have fucked up. All of us. Big time. Integration is an absolute joke. Law and order is not being upheld. We, all of us in the heart of society, are going to fix that. The gangs are going to be utterly smashed.
The inclusion of the Sweden Democrats in the new Swedish government after this election arguably now gives Sweden the most populist right government in the Western world now, at least until Italy votes later this month.
Sweden? Who would have thought it!
God you are so thick. Absolutely infuriating. Why on earth do you keep saying things that are just utter nonsense?
“The inclusion of the Sweden Democrats in the new Swedish government”? WTF? Stop telling blatant lies. C&S is not the same as being in government.
Further, neither M nor KD - the two Min Gov parties - are “populist right”. M are like Tory Wets, and KD are ultra-liberals when compared to other Christian Democratic parties.
Without Sweden Democrats support now the Moderates will not get into power and as the second largest party the Sweden Democrats could certainly demand some government posts for their support.
SD being in government and having ministerial posts is a total impossibility. But then, if you had any knowledge whatsoever about Swedish current affairs, you’d know that.
You are, as always, an utter nincompoop.
No it isn't now. The SDs will be the largest party supporting the new government and even the BBC has pointed out Akesson now wants to be part of the new government, if not he could collapse it.
Akesson is now the Kingmaker whether you like it or not
I cannot be bothered spelling it out to you, because you *always* simply ignore when other posters correct you. You just keep on posting the same nonsense.
He is trying to tell you about Swedish politics is surreal
What worries me is, if a party is of the "right" they are good eggs in HY's book. He would have been thrilled by Hitler's election in 1932 without thinking through the consequences.
No, if I was Swedish I would vote Moderate not Sweden Democrat, I didn't even vote for Farage in the European elections.
However the reality of the numbers after Sweden's election is clear, the Sweden Democrats hold the balance of power
You do seem to get very excited when far right candidates vanquish the centre left. The far right, nor the far left should not be your friends as a One Nation Conservative. Authoritarian extremists are BAD whichever side of the fence they sit.
It is quite amusing to see the Sweden Democrats branded in these articles as 'far right'. One day the 'far right' will actually come on the scene and make parties like the Sweden Democrats look like Nick Clegg circa 2010.
It does seem to me, looking at the changes that have taken place in Sweden through mass immigration and the failure of elements of multiculturalism, that there would inevitably be this type of political reaction.
The real question, for those genuinely concerned about the 'far right', is whether or not the Sweden Democracts and their likely partners can make any real progress at dealing with the situation that has emerged.
Hmm.
"At the height of the campaign, the SD billed a metro train decorated in its electoral colours as the “repatriation express”. “Welcome aboard with a one-way ticket. Next stop, Kabul,” tweeted the party’s legal spokesperson, highlighting the SD’s demand to remove non-European immigrants."
How different is all this to Theresa May's "go home or face arrest" vans circa 2012/2013? It just seems to me like it is all the same thing. I don't think that the Sweden Democrats have any actual, real policy of repatriating lawful immigrants, they are trying to deal with illegal immigration and abuses in the system. You may not like this which is fair enough. But you have to ask yourself the question, is it better for these concerns to be advanced through the democratic system, or in some other way? I don't really know Sweden well enough to say how I would vote, but it seems like there are lots of problems arising from mass immigration, including gun crime, which the liberal system is not dealing particularly well with.
Indeed.
The “liberal system”, as you describe it, has indeed failed regarding law & order and regarding integration. We all know that. It is rarely publicly acknowledged, but The Establishment in Sweden (which is all the parties excluding V and SD) have fucked up. Big time. We are going to fix it.
Which particular party are you identifying yourself with here, or do you mean the rightwing coalition as a whole ?
Hate to repeat myself for the umpteenth time, but there is no “rightwing coalition”.
I am identifying myself with mainstream Sweden, with ‘The Establishment’: S+M+C+KD+MP+L. We have fucked up. All of us. Big time. Integration is an absolute joke. Law and order is not being upheld. We, all of us in the heart of society, are going to fix that. The gangs are going to be utterly smashed.
The inclusion of the Sweden Democrats in the new Swedish government after this election arguably now gives Sweden the most populist right government in the Western world now, at least until Italy votes later this month.
Sweden? Who would have thought it!
God you are so thick. Absolutely infuriating. Why on earth do you keep saying things that are just utter nonsense?
“The inclusion of the Sweden Democrats in the new Swedish government”? WTF? Stop telling blatant lies. C&S is not the same as being in government.
Further, neither M nor KD - the two Min Gov parties - are “populist right”. M are like Tory Wets, and KD are ultra-liberals when compared to other Christian Democratic parties.
Without Sweden Democrats support now the Moderates will not get into power and as the second largest party the Sweden Democrats could certainly demand some government posts for their support.
SD being in government and having ministerial posts is a total impossibility. But then, if you had any knowledge whatsoever about Swedish current affairs, you’d know that.
You are, as always, an utter nincompoop.
No it isn't now. The SDs will be the largest party supporting the new government and even the BBC has pointed out Akesson now wants to be part of the new government, if not he could collapse it.
Akesson is now the Kingmaker whether you like it or not
I cannot be bothered spelling it out to you, because you *always* simply ignore when other posters correct you. You just keep on posting the same nonsense.
He is trying to tell you about Swedish politics is surreal
What worries me is, if a party is of the "right" they are good eggs in HY's book. He would have been thrilled by Hitler's election in 1932 without thinking through the consequences.
No, if I was Swedish I would vote Moderate not Sweden Democrat, I didn't even vote for Farage in the European elections.
However the reality of the numbers after Sweden's election is clear, the Sweden Democrats hold the balance of power
You do seem to get very excited when far right candidates vanquish the centre left. The far right, nor the far left should not be your friends as a One Nation Conservative. Authoritarian extremists are BAD whichever side of the fence they sit.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
Gas futures peaked at 702p/therm. They are now at 365 and the trend is down.
I brought up the possibility of deflation a couple of weeks ago, was laughed at by some at the time.
Once the spike up rolls out of the data, some funny things can happen, some technical deflation is absolutely possible in the years ahead.
China’s screwups over Zero COVID have led to raw material gluts. Eiirooe hitting tank tops on natural gas storage has meant a big decrease in demand.
China will sort itself out, and winter is coming.
It’s not over yet.
Even if the Russian invasion of Ukraine ends with a complete defeat for Russia, there is nearly no chance that the gas deliveries will be restarted,
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
I was married in the same Church (Cradley, Hfds) as Graeme Hick. A different Minister for me though as Mike Vockins was on tour as Chaplain with England when I got married.
Hick was sublime at New Road. Due to the eligibility nonsense he missed out his earlier, and better years for England.
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
I think the problem with public order/harrassment legislation is that it, were it to be applied fairly by the police (ie in every possible instance of harrassment or disorder) then they would be making millions of arrests every day. It always struck me as something that they have in their back pocket to be used occasionally as a sort of last resort when managing public affairs. But in recent years they are using it more proactively in the service of particular 'priorities'.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
Yes, it's been widely reported - see for example Samsung's forward guidance. Though if the world avoids a major Russia induced recession, improving demand might just change that picture. And should China decide to mess with Taiwan....
Interesting that some sectors (SiC products) are still growing rapidly, and still very much supply constrained.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
Gas futures peaked at 702p/therm. They are now at 365 and the trend is down.
I brought up the possibility of deflation a couple of weeks ago, was laughed at by some at the time.
Once the spike up rolls out of the data, some funny things can happen, some technical deflation is absolutely possible in the years ahead.
We are very definitely not the same as the US, though.
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
He reminds me a little of Gower, at least on the occasions he hits the ball. He has the same tall, languid elegance. And he is also prone to severe carelessness.
Zak Crawley is a middle order batsman trying to play as an opener - with very similar results to what would have happened had Gower tried it. To his credit, he is trying to rein in his flashier instincts during the first ten overs, with some success. And he is doing no worse than many of the specialist openers who England have tried since Cook/Strauss. He is the Joe Cole of the England cricket team - talented player gamefully playing out of position due to lack of obvious candidates in that position and too many candidates in his favoured position.
The problem I see is that the key skills of an opening batsman is knowing when you can get away with not playing the ball; having a tight defence and protecting the stumps until the shine is off the ball and the best bowlers of the other side have had their go. None of these are particularly useful in the shorter versions of the game where all the money is being made and work is plentiful if you have the talent. I am not confident we will ever have an out and out opener,such as a Cook or an Atherton, again. It is not a good career move. OTOH it has added to the excitment of test match cricket.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
Gas futures peaked at 702p/therm. They are now at 365 and the trend is down.
I brought up the possibility of deflation a couple of weeks ago, was laughed at by some at the time.
Once the spike up rolls out of the data, some funny things can happen, some technical deflation is absolutely possible in the years ahead.
Its possible, but the deflation will be from a much higher nominal price. Personally I think secondary effects, such as wage growth, will mean it doesn't happen.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
It's almost like rising prices encourage supply.
I think that this was more strategic though: what on earth are we going to do if China takes Taiwan? As Taiwan has not stopped making them oversupply is inevitable.
BBC saying Ukrainians had an 8 - 1 superiority in numbers over the Russians in the area. Might explain something? Where was the Russian Air Force and how did the Russians not have an apparent clue of the Ukranian build up. Perhaps this is all a devlish Russian plot to decieve us all. Do not think so.
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
It's almost like rising prices encourage supply.
I think that this was more strategic though: what on earth are we going to do if China takes Taiwan? As Taiwan has not stopped making them oversupply is inevitable.
That is partly what Biden's Chips Act was about. The US is now building its first new memory fab for a quarter of century.
It was in everyone's interests to pretend it wasn't. The Crown, because otherwise it makes their position precarious (any time you don't like a King, dump them and get a new one). The ordinary people, because it's easier and means if they don't get a say, nobody else does either. And actually, the electors themselves, because it provides certainty and stability.
Doesn't mean it wasn't a thing. And in fact there were good reasons for it. If you had a choice, would you want as your military leader a five year old boy/girl who can just about lift a toy wooden sword, or their 30 year old uncle who has already proved himself a successful war leader?
Difficulties tended to arise later on with sons and daughters who had been overlooked. So, for example, when Alfred died his nephew Aethelstan tried to seize the throne of Wessex. And when Stephen was elected King, his cousin spent sixteen years trying to throw him off the throne.
Which is also where you begin to get the royal tradition of having the losers *cough* eliminated. In Ireland this used to be done by having them blinded (as the disabled were ineligible to be kings) but in later medieval England failed monarchs tended to suffer mysterious accidents. Arthur de Bretagne vanished after John became King. Richard II allegedly starved himself to death. Henry VI 'died of pure displeasure and melancholy' that somehow caused a massive skull wound. While exactly what Richard III did to his nephews remains mysterious but it didn't involve toys and chocolate.
Depends whether poison was used and what they put it in.
I know someone who gets genuinely upset and angry at the suggestion Richard III offed his nephews. They seem to demand beyond reasonable doubt levels of proof as if he was literally on trial today.
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
It is now. 26 minutes. The decision of the Umpires last night may have been in accordance with the laws but it was absurd.
The underlying reality is probably that it was more a decision of the ECB's lawyers than the Umpires. They would be terrified that somebody might get hurt and sue. Safety first would be the guiding principle; that is, the safety of the lawyers giving the advice. They would offer the advice that minimises the risk to their professional indemnity contracts.
It's a wonder they allow cricket to be played at all, or indeed any sport.
BBC saying Ukrainians had an 8 - 1 superiority in numbers over the Russians in the area. Might explain something? Where was the Russian Air Force and how did the Russians not have an apparent clue of the Ukranian build up. Perhaps this is all a devlish Russian plot to decieve us all. Do not think so.
I think that except extremely locally that is very unlikely. What the Russians were missing was a tiered defence with units who were able to plug the holes where armour had punched through. The second and third lines of defence had been stripped out and sent to Kherson where the attack was supposed to be. The real cause of this victory is a brilliant deceit by the Ukranians about where they were going to strike.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
It's almost like rising prices encourage supply.
It also helps that cryptocurrency buyers have collapsed. They're unloading a bunch of 3080Ti and 3070s second hand and not replacing them with new 3090s and aren't expected to buy 4080s next month. That's left Nvidia with at least 50% too much 5N capacity which TSMC have said they need to sell for cheap, I know AMD/Sony has purchased a big block for the PS5 but there's millions of wafers unsold at TSMC, Intel and Samsung right now.
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
BBC saying Ukrainians had an 8 - 1 superiority in numbers over the Russians in the area. Might explain something? Where was the Russian Air Force and how did the Russians not have an apparent clue of the Ukranian build up. Perhaps this is all a devlish Russian plot to decieve us all. Do not think so.
I think that except extremely locally that is very unlikely. What the Russians were missing was a tiered defence with units who were able to plug the holes where armour had punched through. The second and third lines of defence had been stripped out and sent to Kherson where the attack was supposed to be. The real cause of this victory is a brilliant deceit by the Ukranians about where they were going to strike.
There's also the fact that Ukraine introduced conscription over six months back. A fair number of those troops will now be sufficiently trained to be useful. Russia's recent semi-conscripts, on the other hand...
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
I think the problem with public order/harrassment legislation is that it, were it to be applied fairly by the police (ie in every possible instance of harrassment or disorder) then they would be making millions of arrests every day. It always struck me as something that they have in their back pocket to be used occasionally as a sort of last resort when managing public affairs. But in recent years they are using it more proactively in the service of particular 'priorities'.
Which is why the police being members of Stonewall's various schemes is so wrong. It creates a conflict of interest between their obligation to police "without fear or favour" and creates the perception of bias - and very likely the actuality (see the policing of various Pride events or Lesbian / feminist events). The police should have no special relationship with any lobby group.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
It's almost like rising prices encourage supply.
I think that this was more strategic though: what on earth are we going to do if China takes Taiwan? As Taiwan has not stopped making them oversupply is inevitable.
That is partly what Biden's Chips Act was about. The US is now building its first new memory fab for a quarter of century.
The Micron one, right? It's interesting that they're bothering with memory because that's Japan and South Korea rather than Taiwan, I don't see either of those countries being invaded by China.
It is now. 26 minutes. The decision of the Umpires last night may have been in accordance with the laws but it was absurd.
I feel for the umpires. The laws have to be applied. The law needs to be more realistic and flexible.
Yes and no. They misjudged the time to take the players off on day 3. They could easily have played another half hour then. Had they done so they would not have had to take the players off at that point on day 4. This is not some blinding (hah) insight by me, Atherton was very good on this on both days. The laws require that if such a mistake is made on the first day it has to be repeated each day of the test. That is a bit daft.
It was in everyone's interests to pretend it wasn't. The Crown, because otherwise it makes their position precarious (any time you don't like a King, dump them and get a new one). The ordinary people, because it's easier and means if they don't get a say, nobody else does either. And actually, the electors themselves, because it provides certainty and stability.
Doesn't mean it wasn't a thing. And in fact there were good reasons for it. If you had a choice, would you want as your military leader a five year old boy/girl who can just about lift a toy wooden sword, or their 30 year old uncle who has already proved himself a successful war leader?
Difficulties tended to arise later on with sons and daughters who had been overlooked. So, for example, when Alfred died his nephew Aethelstan tried to seize the throne of Wessex. And when Stephen was elected King, his cousin spent sixteen years trying to throw him off the throne.
Which is also where you begin to get the royal tradition of having the losers *cough* eliminated. In Ireland this used to be done by having them blinded (as the disabled were ineligible to be kings) but in later medieval England failed monarchs tended to suffer mysterious accidents. Arthur de Bretagne vanished after John became King. Richard II allegedly starved himself to death. Henry VI 'died of pure displeasure and melancholy' that somehow caused a massive skull wound. While exactly what Richard III did to his nephews remains mysterious but it didn't involve toys and chocolate.
Depends whether poison was used and what they put it in.
I know someone who gets genuinely upset and angry at the suggestion Richard III offed his nephews. They seem to demand beyond reasonable doubt levels of proof as if he was literally on trial today.
But let's be real, he did it.
AIUI the Richard III society says he didn't. I don't know what alternative explanation they've offered for the last disappearance.
In passing, I note that we've never had a King Richard since!
Case where Mermaids and the LGBT Consortium is trying to strip the LGB Alliance of its charitable status on the basis that is transphobic:
LGB Alliance Barrister: the view that someone with a female body attracted to men, is a heterosexual woman, that is inconsistent with the values of your organisations?
Paul Roberts, CEO of LGBT Consortium. yes, that is inconsistent with our values.
I do hope Harry is feinting when he says he will honour his father at the start of his reign. I hope he launches his book one day soon with no prior notice.
After all, anyone with any sense knows what his father meant when he wished Harry good luck building his life overseas. It's part of British ruling class culture to think it's terribly sophisticated to say one thing and mean another.
The appearance together of the two sons each with their wives was also presumably scripted after focus groups reported that the population wasn't too keen on Harry being ordered not to bring his wife if he came to Balmoral and being told that even without her he wasn't welcome on the family RAF flight.
Meanwhile there is comedy in how the king has told MPs and even lords and ladies that he will uphold parliamentary traditions.
What an absolute plonker.
Oh thank you, thank you, Sir, for deciding you won't sideline parliament. That is so kind of you. *tugs forelock* Especially given that the leading figures on both sides of the Commons recently appealed to their god to "save" you. They cheer you. Then in return they receive your kind and voluntary grace. Just how things should be!
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
It's almost like rising prices encourage supply.
It also helps that cryptocurrency buyers have collapsed. They're unloading a bunch of 3080Ti and 3070s second hand and not replacing them with new 3090s and aren't expected to buy 4080s next month. That's left Nvidia with at least 50% too much 5N capacity which TSMC have said they need to sell for cheap, I know AMD/Sony has purchased a big block for the PS5 but there's millions of wafers unsold at TSMC, Intel and Samsung right now.
If China exits lockdown any time soon, the picture could change again. There are quite a few binary events with big economic impact in the next year.
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
SHE was naked under a see through dress. Do you want to get cancelled?
I am not going to be bullied into telling a lie. If a man can be free to say that he is a woman, then I am equally free to say that he isn't.
At the "proclamation" of the king's "accession" in Oxford, a man was arrested for shouting "Who elected him?"
He was later "de-arrested". "A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: 'A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford. He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence."
I wonder whether they told him he'd been "de-arrested", and if so, why he didn't just walk out of the police station.
I guess the authorities don't want anyone to appear in court in the near future (Magna Carta etc.) for expressing republican sentiments.
There's a difference between being arrested and removed.
If someone was highly disruptive in a comedy club, musical or theatre, shouting abuse or making a scene, you'd expect them to be thrown out by security, and rightly so.
But he wasn't in a club, theatre etc, he was in a public place.
He wasn't the only one arrested yesterday by overzealous police, free speech is important.
Free speech is important but there's a time and a place.
It's not really free speech then.
Living in a society requires concessions to others’ feelings. There’s a difference between a free debate and protesting at a funeral cortège. Now if it was a Pinochet or Franco (for example) there might be a case because of their actions - but for the Queen there is no over-riding justification.
It wasn't a funeral cortege.
God, you're such a dick.
It was quite literally a funeral cortege. The BBC spent hours announcing it so.
I've changed my mind: all republicans should be arrested for the next 10 days, and subject to dental torture as well.
"...A Thames Valley police spokesperson said: “A 45-year-old man was arrested in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford.
“He has subsequently been de-arrested and is engaging with us voluntarily as we investigate a public order offence. The man was arrested on suspicion of a public order offence [under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986].”..."
And I'm not a republican.
I will take the last piece of your comment as a poor joke.
We’ve only heard the protester’s side though. I suspect the police asked him to desist - he refused; they asked him to depart - he refused; arresting him resolved the situation…
I hate to bring the law into this argument. But unless someone is committing an offence or is about to you cannot simply arrest someone simply because they disagree with the police. Or express a minority view or say something that others might find in poor taste.
This is what s. 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 says -
"Harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening [F5or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F5or abusive],
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling."
Hard to see how the phrase "Who elected him" could be said to be threatening or abusive.
"In poor taste" or "inappropriately timed" are not yet criminal offences, thank God.
And there is another point: there are plenty of other examples in recent weeks of people in public using words threatening violence to women, sometimes names women or a category of women and behaving in abusive and violent ways toward them with the police standing by and doing precisely nothing even when asked by the targets for help.
The police will do themselves no favours with an inconsistent approach to such laws. They exist to stop crimes not to enforce good manners. And it is time the police - and others - realised this.
ISTR something similar happened in Manchester around the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst where there was a feminist/trans stand off.
Last week in London a man from some group called Pissed Off Trannies brought 60 bottles of urine to the pavement outside the offices of the ECHR in Westminster, poured some of it over the front door of the offices and over himself. He was naked under a see through dress and in some photos visibly aroused. The police arrived. He has not, AFAIK, been arrested even though his identity is known.
There are at least 5 possible offences for which he could be arrested.
1. Indecent exposure 2. Public Order Act 1986. 3. Littering under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 4. Possibly criminal damage 5. Intentionally or recklessly causing a public nuisance contrary to S. 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022
Why aren't the police doing anything? Why have the police not arrested men holding up banners saying "Kill Terfs!" Or the violent mob attacking women at a Womens Rights March in Bristol? And so on.
There is a fine line between free speech and public disorder. But the police seem not to know what it is, nor what the law says and they fail to apply the law consistently or lawfully. It brings them into disrepute and risk people feeling that they will only have the protection of the law and the police if they behave in ways in which the police approve or belong to approved / favoured groups. That is not how things should be in a free democratic society under the rule of law.
From an article on the protest:
"The activist, speaking to VICE on the condition of anonymity, described the dramatic action as “an extreme version of the public embarrassment that trans people experience on a daily basis, using the toilet that either doesn't fit with their gender or using the one that does, and then facing the backlash of people's judgement”."
Bollocks. Frankly. This is extreme narcissism on stilts. No consideration whatsoever about whether women want to share toilets with men pissing all over the place or men getting aroused while wearing women's clothes.
Is it illegal to use the "wrong" toilets? I mean, if I use a cubicle in women's loo have I broken the law?
I think not. In which case the trans person can use whichever toilet they want can't they?
Personally, I don't care (who looks at other people in these places anyway?) but I understand that some people do. Can't see it's a big issue to be honest.
Several religions (Judaism, Islam, to mention but two) have severe structures on women being in the presence of men. But their rights are to be ignored because of a few people’s feelings. See the Hampstead Ponds.
good thing too
That these womens rights are to be ignored because some men believe they are women?
It is interesting to note the change in 'right thinking' attitudes to the trans issue, which on a long timeline, will defeat trans activism. In 'my day', once gender reassignment surgery had taken place, the person was always thought of and referred to as a woman, even if they looked like Bernard Bresslaw. Now it seems that right leaning politicians are required to say that transsexuals are not women, regardless of gender reassignment. It's an extremely traditionalist view, which will 'set back' the trans debate a lot from a pro-trans perspective. Blowback in action.
I do hope Harry is feinting when he says he will honour his father at the start of his reign. I hope he launches his book one day soon with no prior notice.
After all, anyone with any sense knows what his father meant when he wished Harry good luck building his life overseas. It's part of British ruling class culture to think it's terribly sophisticated to say one thing and mean another.
The appearance together of the two sons each with their wives was also presumably scripted after focus groups reported that the population wasn't too keen on Harry being ordered not to bring his wife if he came to Balmoral and being told that even without her he wasn't welcome on the family RAF flight.
Meanwhile there is comedy in how the king has told MPs and even lords and ladies that he will uphold parliamentary traditions.
What an absolute plonker.
Oh thank you, thank you, Sir, for deciding you won't sideline parliament. That is so kind of you. *tugs forelock* Especially given that the leading figures on both sides of the Commons recently appealed to their god to "save" you. They cheer you. Then in return they receive your kind and voluntary grace. Just how things should be!
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I do hope Harry is feinting when he says he will honour his father at the start of his reign. I hope he launches his book one day soon with no prior notice.
After all, anyone with any sense knows what his father meant when he wished Harry good luck building his life overseas. It's part of British ruling class culture to think it's terribly sophisticated to say one thing and mean another.
The appearance together of the two sons each with their wives was also presumably scripted after focus groups reported that the population wasn't too keen on Harry being ordered not to bring his wife if he came to Balmoral and being told that even without her he wasn't welcome on the family RAF flight.
Meanwhile there is comedy in how the king has told MPs and even lords and ladies that he will uphold parliamentary traditions.
What an absolute plonker.
Oh thank you, thank you, Sir, for deciding you won't sideline parliament. That is so kind of you. *tugs forelock* Especially given that the leading figures on both sides of the Commons recently appealed to their god to "save" you. They cheer you. Then in return they receive your kind and voluntary grace. Just how things should be!
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
It's almost like rising prices encourage supply.
It also helps that cryptocurrency buyers have collapsed. They're unloading a bunch of 3080Ti and 3070s second hand and not replacing them with new 3090s and aren't expected to buy 4080s next month. That's left Nvidia with at least 50% too much 5N capacity which TSMC have said they need to sell for cheap, I know AMD/Sony has purchased a big block for the PS5 but there's millions of wafers unsold at TSMC, Intel and Samsung right now.
If China exits lockdown any time soon, the picture could change again. There are quite a few binary events with big economic impact in the next year.
China can't purchase any of the spare TSMC or Samsung capacity so I don't think it's a huge factor, indeed they've been saying (but providing no proof) that SMIC has cracked 10nm and 7nm with a fully Chinese supply chain.
Additionally TSMC and Samsung both have 4 nanometre fabs winding up to full production at the moment which means a bunch of 8N and 7N processes move down 1.5 nodes, freeing it up in mid 2023 for everyone not at the cutting edge.
I do hope Harry is feinting when he says he will honour his father at the start of his reign. I hope he launches his book one day soon with no prior notice.
After all, anyone with any sense knows what his father meant when he wished Harry good luck building his life overseas. It's part of British ruling class culture to think it's terribly sophisticated to say one thing and mean another.
The appearance together of the two sons each with their wives was also presumably scripted after focus groups reported that the population wasn't too keen on Harry being ordered not to bring his wife if he came to Balmoral and being told that even without her he wasn't welcome on the family RAF flight.
Meanwhile there is comedy in how the king has told MPs and even lords and ladies that he will uphold parliamentary traditions.
What an absolute plonker.
Oh thank you, thank you, Sir, for deciding you won't sideline parliament. That is so kind of you. *tugs forelock* Especially given that the leading figures on both sides of the Commons recently appealed to their god to "save" you. They cheer you. Then in return they receive your kind and voluntary grace. Just how things should be!
Afternoon all. A thought on the ComRes poll. With Lab not declining but Tory plus 6 it looks on the face of it like Tory waverers hardening into the new PM. Also worth noting two other things (for Sept lead watchers) 1) Comres have tended towards slightly larger leads and higher Lab score than the average (but not excessively so) 2) they have not reported since defenestration early July so we don't know what range they'd have been finding or if their Tory score had already been creeping up
With PP also showing a move in, theres at least a hint that things may be tightening. Redfield are not trailing a 5pm poll so either they are just not doing any fanfare but reporting as normal as it were during mourning or they are on pause and we wont get another one until Sept 22nd
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Where is this 'long time friends' thing coming from? Were they not welcomed cordially and in return treated the Queen and Prince Phillip welcomingly and cordially? I've never heard of anything else taking place.
Interesting how little cut through the Russian collapse is having with the public at large so far. People seem really surprised when I tell them about it.
I miss the old Independent. It would have concluded its royal coverage by now and be back to reporting on actual news.
I do hope Harry is feinting when he says he will honour his father at the start of his reign. I hope he launches his book one day soon with no prior notice.
After all, anyone with any sense knows what his father meant when he wished Harry good luck building his life overseas. It's part of British ruling class culture to think it's terribly sophisticated to say one thing and mean another.
The appearance together of the two sons each with their wives was also presumably scripted after focus groups reported that the population wasn't too keen on Harry being ordered not to bring his wife if he came to Balmoral and being told that even without her he wasn't welcome on the family RAF flight.
Meanwhile there is comedy in how the king has told MPs and even lords and ladies that he will uphold parliamentary traditions.
What an absolute plonker.
Oh thank you, thank you, Sir, for deciding you won't sideline parliament. That is so kind of you. *tugs forelock* Especially given that the leading figures on both sides of the Commons recently appealed to their god to "save" you. They cheer you. Then in return they receive your kind and voluntary grace. Just how things should be!
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Would be a bit of a mistake - there’s still a good chance Trump is next POTUS and we all know how thin skinned he is. If the Obamas were invited and he wasn’t he would definitely hold a grudge so I imagine the UK’s diplomatic mob are advising against.
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Where is this 'long time friends' thing coming from? Were they not welcomed cordially and in return treated the Queen and Prince Phillip welcomingly and cordially? I've never heard of anything else taking place.
I agree, I've never got that impression either. Edit - and US politics will get in the way, the Palace would not want to be seen as favouring democrats with midterms on the horizon.
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Where is this 'long time friends' thing coming from? Were they not welcomed cordially and in return treated the Queen and Prince Phillip welcomingly and cordially? I've never heard of anything else taking place.
That's what I mean. Obviously they aren't long time friends of Her Majesty but a "form of words" will be found so they can be invited IMO.
All just my speculation of course. I could be talking complete and utter tom-tit (not for the first time) haha!
That is quite a persuasive line of analysis. But it also may be what Russia wants us to think.
I don't think they are saying anything that's obviously bollocks. Particularly that the EU are going to have pay for the reconstruction and the lend-lease weapons debt of whatever's left of Ukraine. They can't afford a failed state on their border and I doubt Ukraine are going to get any significant amount of cash out of the UK,
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Where is this 'long time friends' thing coming from? Were they not welcomed cordially and in return treated the Queen and Prince Phillip welcomingly and cordially? I've never heard of anything else taking place.
I agree, I've never got that impression either.
UK-wise he wasn't a friendly President at all. Raids on Standard Chartered and BP, Brexit, giving the PM a box set of dvds from the White House Gift shop that weren't even PAL, booting Churchill out of the Oval office - not all significant but not adding up to a friendly picture. From a UK perspective, Trump deserves his place a lot more.
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Where is this 'long time friends' thing coming from? Were they not welcomed cordially and in return treated the Queen and Prince Phillip welcomingly and cordially? I've never heard of anything else taking place.
I agree, I've never got that impression either.
UK-wise he wasn't a friendly President at all. Raids on Standard Chartered and BP, Brexit, giving the PM a box set of dvds from the White House Gift shop that weren't even PAL, booting Churchill out of the Oval office - not all significant but not adding up to a friendly picture. From a UK perspective, Trump deserves his place a lot more.
I dont disagree with that. If we take the raw 'grrrrrrrr Trump, yayBama!' feelings out
They arent in recess, they dont need to be recalled. They need to cancel the Sept 22nd recess though
The death of the Queen, which led to parliament being in recess this week, put those plans on hold. But at the lobby briefing, when asked if there would be a fiscal event next week, the spokesperson replied:
We are still planning to deliver a fiscal event this month. We would not do that in recess. Beyond that, we have not set out a date.
In practice, that means the emergency “budget” is pencilled in for next week. MPs were meant to be on recess next week, because the Lib Dems were supposed to be holding their party conference then, but that has been cancelled. They could return to parliament after the Queen’s funeral a week today.
There's rather too many of these incidents going on. Time for the BBC and others to dial down the sheer quantity and tone of the coverage just a little until next week, I think.
That is quite a persuasive line of analysis. But it also may be what Russia wants us to think.
Or it may be both.
The alternative perspective on this, is that it is hard to see how getting caught up in shipping unlimited amounts of arms to Ukraine to support an endless war against Russia would be regarded by the Americans as a good idea, after the experience of Afghanistan and Iraq. Particularly when their own original intelligence assessment was such that Ukraine had no chance. For much of the conflict, Russia has been 'held back' primarily by arms provided by the US, under what is clearly massive and unprecedented public pressure.
Why ship loads of arms to Ukraine on a 'lend lease' scheme, when there is no chance they would ever get the money back, if Russia wins? And that is before you get in to the problem/risks, still valid, of possible nuclear escalation.
(US) Deflation in the pipeline, heading for the PPI, CPI, PCE Deflator: from post-COVID price peaks, lumber -60%, copper -35%, oil -35%, iron ore -60%, DRAM -46%, corn -17%, Baltic freight rates -79%, gold -17%, and silver -39%. https://twitter.com/CathieDWood/status/1569182368954724352
We're about to go from famine to feast for silicon chips IMO. I've spoken to many industry people who say that they're being offered 5N, 6N and 7N capacity for low prices by TSMC and Samsung plus Intel have got their improved 10nm process running as well (which is actually closer in density to the TSMC 6N process) and are said to be offering capacity to third parties in line with their gun for hire policy.
It's almost like rising prices encourage supply.
It also helps that cryptocurrency buyers have collapsed. They're unloading a bunch of 3080Ti and 3070s second hand and not replacing them with new 3090s and aren't expected to buy 4080s next month. That's left Nvidia with at least 50% too much 5N capacity which TSMC have said they need to sell for cheap, I know AMD/Sony has purchased a big block for the PS5 but there's millions of wafers unsold at TSMC, Intel and Samsung right now.
If China exits lockdown any time soon, the picture could change again. There are quite a few binary events with big economic impact in the next year.
China can't purchase any of the spare TSMC or Samsung capacity so I don't think it's a huge factor, indeed they've been saying (but providing no proof) that SMIC has cracked 10nm and 7nm with a fully Chinese supply chain.
Additionally TSMC and Samsung both have 4 nanometre fabs winding up to full production at the moment which means a bunch of 8N and 7N processes move down 1.5 nodes, freeing it up in mid 2023 for everyone not at the cutting edge.
It's not a direct effect, but China restarting growth would be a major driver for world demand. As would a defeat of Russia's invasion, and a resolution of the aftermath.
I've no doubt you're right that there will be a glut over the next year, but it might not be very long lasting.
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
He reminds me a little of Gower, at least on the occasions he hits the ball. He has the same tall, languid elegance. And he is also prone to severe carelessness.
Gower was so careless that her scored 8231 test runs @ 44.25 for England. I wish Crawly were as good as that. In my view Gower has long been maligned unfairly for his batting approach.
I'm assuming they werent arrested, in which case its for their safety. Febrile atmosphere when feelings are high. Its the same reason oppising view marches are kept apart, its in the interests of keeping the peace. He must be allowed to express that opinion, but not at the potential ridk of public order. Yes, anyone attacking him could and should be arrested but that won't unbreak his nose etc
UK-wise he wasn't a friendly President at all. Raids on Standard Chartered and BP, Brexit, giving the PM a box set of dvds from the White House Gift shop that weren't even PAL, booting Churchill out of the Oval office - not all significant but not adding up to a friendly picture. From a UK perspective, Trump deserves his place a lot more.
Trump's a shit and has no drip. Both Obamas are cool. Who would you want at your social function?
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
I was married in the same Church (Cradley, Hfds) as Graeme Hick. A different Minister for me though as Mike Vockins was on tour as Chaplain with England when I got married.
Hick was sublime at New Road. Due to the eligibility nonsense he missed out his earlier, and better years for England.
He also had an issue with extreme pace (not alone in that) and had the misfortune to encounter the WI with some of their best quartets. We also seemed to play the WI a lot more back then.
It is now. 26 minutes. The decision of the Umpires last night may have been in accordance with the laws but it was absurd.
The underlying reality is probably that it was more a decision of the ECB's lawyers than the Umpires. They would be terrified that somebody might get hurt and sue. Safety first would be the guiding principle; that is, the safety of the lawyers giving the advice. They would offer the advice that minimises the risk to their professional indemnity contracts.
It's a wonder they allow cricket to be played at all, or indeed any sport.
It's not safety, it's trying to fairness to both teams and taking discretion out of the question. Take a reading when you believe it is no longer fit for play and that becomes the mark. Doesn't matter if its quicks or spinners, openers or tailenders. Job done.
And yet last night both sides wanted to finish it.
Mike is absolutely correct: events have destroyed any chance Liz had. The plan would have been to explode onto the scene with a plethora of controversial libertarian proposals, causing mayhem and seizing the media narrative. That ship has now sailed. By the time Liz gets any room for manoeuvre public weariness will already have set in and everyone will be thinking about the next installment. It's over I'm afraid.
It is far from over and labour are about to find out they have competition for 2024
They may still win but it is not as likely now
Liz is a dud. You know that. That's why you supported Rishi.
You really do not keep up do you
Rishi long since lost me and Truss has won me over
You may well have a genuine fight on your hands and certainly the 2024 election is a contest again
They arent in recess, they dont need to be recalled. They need to cancel the Sept 22nd recess though
The death of the Queen, which led to parliament being in recess this week, put those plans on hold. But at the lobby briefing, when asked if there would be a fiscal event next week, the spokesperson replied:
We are still planning to deliver a fiscal event this month. We would not do that in recess. Beyond that, we have not set out a date.
In practice, that means the emergency “budget” is pencilled in for next week. MPs were meant to be on recess next week, because the Lib Dems were supposed to be holding their party conference then, but that has been cancelled. They could return to parliament after the Queen’s funeral a week today.
The HoC website says conference recess was due 22 Sept to Oct 17? I hadnt realised the 10 days mournung meant recess, i thought it was just no business, but it seems it does. My error.
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
He reminds me a little of Gower, at least on the occasions he hits the ball. He has the same tall, languid elegance. And he is also prone to severe carelessness.
Gower was so careless that her scored 8231 test runs @ 44.25 for England. I wish Crawly were as good as that. In my view Gower has long been maligned unfairly for his batting approach.
Gower was unfairly criticised because he batted laconically and effortlessly, so his caught in the cawdron dismissals 'looked' lazy
BBC saying Ukrainians had an 8 - 1 superiority in numbers over the Russians in the area. Might explain something? Where was the Russian Air Force and how did the Russians not have an apparent clue of the Ukranian build up. Perhaps this is all a devlish Russian plot to decieve us all. Do not think so.
I think that except extremely locally that is very unlikely. What the Russians were missing was a tiered defence with units who were able to plug the holes where armour had punched through. The second and third lines of defence had been stripped out and sent to Kherson where the attack was supposed to be. The real cause of this victory is a brilliant deceit by the Ukranians about where they were going to strike.
There's also the fact that Ukraine introduced conscription over six months back. A fair number of those troops will now be sufficiently trained to be useful. Russia's recent semi-conscripts, on the other hand...
The Russians themselves, or at least the self styled patriots, are complaining ever more bitterly about this. A very significant portion of the Russian army is made up of mercenary groups like the Wagner group and Chechens. There are comparatively few conventional army Russians and even they tend to come from poor provinces about whom not many care. This has allowed Putin to get away with the 50k dead to date with comparatively little flack. The problem now is if he goes for conscription or mobilisation those ratios will change sharply. It is unlikely the patriot group are anything like a majority on this.
UK-wise he wasn't a friendly President at all. Raids on Standard Chartered and BP, Brexit, giving the PM a box set of dvds from the White House Gift shop that weren't even PAL, booting Churchill out of the Oval office - not all significant but not adding up to a friendly picture. From a UK perspective, Trump deserves his place a lot more.
Trump's a shit and has no drip. Both Obamas are cool. Who would you want at your social function?
The one that had a chance of becoming President again.
Mike is absolutely correct: events have destroyed any chance Liz had. The plan would have been to explode onto the scene with a plethora of controversial libertarian proposals, causing mayhem and seizing the media narrative. That ship has now sailed. By the time Liz gets any room for manoeuvre public weariness will already have set in and everyone will be thinking about the next installment. It's over I'm afraid.
It is far from over and labour are about to find out they have competition for 2024
They may still win but it is not as likely now
Liz is a dud. You know that. That's why you supported Rishi.
You really do not keep up do you
Rishi long since lost me and Truss has won me over
You may well have a genuine fight on your hands and certainly the 2024 election is a contest again
Its bizarre, back in 2008/09 when Cameron's Tories were well in the lead the "PB Tories" would repeatedly say to take nothing for granted, that nothing is certain, don't rest on your laurels etc
Yet now the shoe is on the other foot, the PB lefties seem to want to act as if the future is all certain, the forthcoming election is going to be a walk in the park for them and it is all signed, sealed and delivered.
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
He reminds me a little of Gower, at least on the occasions he hits the ball. He has the same tall, languid elegance. And he is also prone to severe carelessness.
Gower was so careless that her scored 8231 test runs @ 44.25 for England. I wish Crawly were as good as that. In my view Gower has long been maligned unfairly for his batting approach.
Few who lament Gower's carelessness consider him anything but a great batsman. Just a frustrating one - it always feels as if he could have been even better with a different attitude. Great sportsman are pretty finely tuned, though: there's every possibility that a different attitude would have led to him losing something that made him great (although the counter argument is Jimmy Anderson, who has changed himself a couple of time in his career and got better each time).
My view is that Crawley is not dissimilar from Gower, and if you were to slot him in at four you'd see an altogether more impressive batsman. But England already has a number 4...
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Where is this 'long time friends' thing coming from? Were they not welcomed cordially and in return treated the Queen and Prince Phillip welcomingly and cordially? I've never heard of anything else taking place.
I agree, I've never got that impression either.
UK-wise he wasn't a friendly President at all. Raids on Standard Chartered and BP, Brexit, giving the PM a box set of dvds from the White House Gift shop that weren't even PAL, booting Churchill out of the Oval office - not all significant but not adding up to a friendly picture. From a UK perspective, Trump deserves his place a lot more.
Wasn’t the back of the queue Brexit stuff cancelled out by Obama backing a ‘strong and united’ UK at the time of the Indy ref? I get that the people who orgasmed at the latter invariably pissed & moaned at the former, but plus ça change.
Mike is absolutely correct: events have destroyed any chance Liz had. The plan would have been to explode onto the scene with a plethora of controversial libertarian proposals, causing mayhem and seizing the media narrative. That ship has now sailed. By the time Liz gets any room for manoeuvre public weariness will already have set in and everyone will be thinking about the next installment. It's over I'm afraid.
It is far from over and labour are about to find out they have competition for 2024
They may still win but it is not as likely now
Liz is a dud. You know that. That's why you supported Rishi.
You really do not keep up do you
Rishi long since lost me and Truss has won me over
You may well have a genuine fight on your hands and certainly the 2024 election is a contest again
Friendship ended with RISHI Now TRUSS is my best friend
They arent in recess, they dont need to be recalled. They need to cancel the Sept 22nd recess though
The death of the Queen, which led to parliament being in recess this week, put those plans on hold. But at the lobby briefing, when asked if there would be a fiscal event next week, the spokesperson replied:
We are still planning to deliver a fiscal event this month. We would not do that in recess. Beyond that, we have not set out a date.
In practice, that means the emergency “budget” is pencilled in for next week. MPs were meant to be on recess next week, because the Lib Dems were supposed to be holding their party conference then, but that has been cancelled. They could return to parliament after the Queen’s funeral a week today.
Zak Crawley bears an annoying resemblance to Graeme Hick. Magnificent performer when he gets it right, which is about one innings in ten.
Albeit Hick had a much better overall first class record.
He reminds me a little of Gower, at least on the occasions he hits the ball. He has the same tall, languid elegance. And he is also prone to severe carelessness.
Gower was so careless that her scored 8231 test runs @ 44.25 for England. I wish Crawly were as good as that. In my view Gower has long been maligned unfairly for his batting approach.
Gower was a brilliant batsman but he made it all look so effortless people thought he wasn't trying.
They've actually charged the woman in Edinburgh with breach of the peace for holding up a sign. We're a democracy. Tolerating dissent should be one of our strengths.
This is well out of control. It's behaviour Russia and China would use.
Mike is absolutely correct: events have destroyed any chance Liz had. The plan would have been to explode onto the scene with a plethora of controversial libertarian proposals, causing mayhem and seizing the media narrative. That ship has now sailed. By the time Liz gets any room for manoeuvre public weariness will already have set in and everyone will be thinking about the next installment. It's over I'm afraid.
It is far from over and labour are about to find out they have competition for 2024
They may still win but it is not as likely now
Liz is a dud. You know that. That's why you supported Rishi.
You really do not keep up do you
Rishi long since lost me and Truss has won me over
You may well have a genuine fight on your hands and certainly the 2024 election is a contest again
I think for once I can speak for much of PB when I say that I’m utterly flabbergasted that Truss has managed to win you over. Who saw that coming?!!!
A shame that the Obamas cannot come. They seem to have had a genuine friendship with HMQ, which endured beyond the common courtesies between Heads of State.
I bet somewhere along the way the rules are bent for the Obama's
For Obama’s what?
Only current heads of state allowed to come to Queens funeral. But I wouldn't be surprised if the bend the rule for the Obamas
I would be disappointed if they did.
They'll get a personal invite as long time "friends" of QEII or something I reckon...
Where is this 'long time friends' thing coming from? Were they not welcomed cordially and in return treated the Queen and Prince Phillip welcomingly and cordially? I've never heard of anything else taking place.
I agree, I've never got that impression either.
UK-wise he wasn't a friendly President at all. Raids on Standard Chartered and BP, Brexit, giving the PM a box set of dvds from the White House Gift shop that weren't even PAL, booting Churchill out of the Oval office - not all significant but not adding up to a friendly picture. From a UK perspective, Trump deserves his place a lot more.
Wasn’t the back of the queue Brexit stuff cancelled out by Obama backing a ‘strong and united’ UK at the time of the Indy ref? I get that the people who orgasmed at the latter invariably pissed & moaned at the former, but plus ça change.
Personally I think he should have kept his trap shut on both occasions, though of course for some the acceptability of the intervention is decided by the level of agreement with the sentiment. I am sure there are others who opposed the former but supprted the latter.
Comments
The strength of their position is that an alternative government is impossible without their support. The weakness is that they cannot block it or bring it down without proving that they are unreliable partners, unserious about having a non-Social Democrat government - which would lose a lot of their new-found support. It's a high-stakes game, but one that will not lead to the SD in Government this time round.
To his credit, he is trying to rein in his flashier instincts during the first ten overs, with some success. And he is doing no worse than many of the specialist openers who England have tried since Cook/Strauss. He is the Joe Cole of the England cricket team - talented player gamefully playing out of position due to lack of obvious candidates in that position and too many candidates in his favoured position.
Once the spike up rolls out of the data, some funny things can happen, some technical deflation is absolutely possible in the years ahead.
He's got strong fascist sympathies.
China will sort itself out, and winter is coming.
It’s not over yet.
Even if the Russian invasion of Ukraine ends with a complete defeat for Russia, there is nearly no chance that the gas deliveries will be restarted,
Hick was sublime at New Road. Due to the eligibility nonsense he missed out his earlier, and better years for England.
If that's all she does, she won't win. She needs ~10% of Labour voters back.
Though if the world avoids a major Russia induced recession, improving demand might
just change that picture. And should China decide to mess with Taiwan....
Interesting that some sectors (SiC products) are still growing rapidly, and still very much supply constrained.
Where was the Russian Air Force and how did the Russians not have an apparent clue of the Ukranian build up.
Perhaps this is all a devlish Russian plot to decieve us all. Do not think so.
I know someone who gets genuinely upset and angry at the suggestion Richard III offed his nephews. They seem to demand beyond reasonable doubt levels of proof as if he was literally on trial today.
But let's be real, he did it.
It's a wonder they allow cricket to be played at all, or indeed any sport.
Russia's recent semi-conscripts, on the other hand...
In passing, I note that we've never had a King Richard since!
LGB Alliance Barrister:
the view that someone with a female body attracted to men, is a heterosexual woman, that is inconsistent with the values of your organisations?
Paul Roberts, CEO of LGBT Consortium.
yes, that is inconsistent with our values.
https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1569271096540803073
After all, anyone with any sense knows what his father meant when he wished Harry good luck building his life overseas. It's part of British ruling class culture to think it's terribly sophisticated to say one thing and mean another.
The appearance together of the two sons each with their wives was also presumably scripted after focus groups reported that the population wasn't too keen on Harry being ordered not to bring his wife if he came to Balmoral and being told that even without her he wasn't welcome on the family RAF flight.
Meanwhile there is comedy in how the king has told MPs and even lords and ladies that he will uphold parliamentary traditions.
What an absolute plonker.
Oh thank you, thank you, Sir, for deciding you won't sideline parliament. That is so kind of you. *tugs forelock* Especially given that the leading figures on both sides of the Commons recently appealed to their god to "save" you. They cheer you. Then in return they receive your kind and voluntary grace. Just how things should be!
There are quite a few binary events with big economic impact in the next year.
Additionally TSMC and Samsung both have 4 nanometre fabs winding up to full production at the moment which means a bunch of 8N and 7N processes move down 1.5 nodes, freeing it up in mid 2023 for everyone not at the cutting edge.
A thought on the ComRes poll. With Lab not declining but Tory plus 6 it looks on the face of it like Tory waverers hardening into the new PM. Also worth noting two other things (for Sept lead watchers)
1) Comres have tended towards slightly larger leads and higher Lab score than the average (but not excessively so)
2) they have not reported since defenestration early July so we don't know what range they'd have been finding or if their Tory score had already been creeping up
With PP also showing a move in, theres at least a hint that things may be tightening. Redfield are not trailing a 5pm poll so either they are just not doing any fanfare but reporting as normal as it were during mourning or they are on pause and we wont get another one until Sept 22nd
‘London Woman Dies In NE Scotland’
Edit - and US politics will get in the way, the Palace would not want to be seen as favouring democrats with midterms on the horizon.
All just my speculation of course. I could be talking complete and utter tom-tit (not for the first time) haha!
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1569279653415616512
https://twitter.com/AndrewSparrow/status/1569284228042440704
Where is the PB free speech brigade?
The death of the Queen, which led to parliament being in recess this week, put those plans on hold. But at the lobby briefing, when asked if there would be a fiscal event next week, the spokesperson replied:
We are still planning to deliver a fiscal event this month. We would not do that in recess. Beyond that, we have not set out a date.
In practice, that means the emergency “budget” is pencilled in for next week. MPs were meant to be on recess next week, because the Lib Dems were supposed to be holding their party conference then, but that has been cancelled. They could return to parliament after the Queen’s funeral a week today.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/sep/12/liz-truss-king-charles-parliament-energy-plan-fracking-latest-politics-live?page=with:block-631f12528f0804237ace7594#block-631f12528f0804237ace7594
There's rather too many of these incidents going on. Time for the BBC and others to dial down the sheer quantity and tone of the coverage just a little until next week, I think.
Why ship loads of arms to Ukraine on a 'lend lease' scheme, when there is no chance they would ever get the money back, if Russia wins? And that is before you get in to the problem/risks, still valid, of possible nuclear escalation.
I've no doubt you're right that there will be a glut over the next year, but it might not be very long lasting.
He must be allowed to express that opinion, but not at the potential ridk of public order.
Yes, anyone attacking him could and should be arrested but that won't unbreak his nose etc
Try reading the comments today.
The usual free speech people are being pro-free speech today as well. 👍
Looking back, I should known it would be disaster as soon as Trump said it was "genius move".
https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1568983819247558660
And yet last night both sides wanted to finish it.
Rishi long since lost me and Truss has won me over
You may well have a genuine fight on your hands and certainly the 2024 election is a contest again
I hadnt realised the 10 days mournung meant recess, i thought it was just no business, but it seems it does. My error.
And they're not cool ffs.
Yet now the shoe is on the other foot, the PB lefties seem to want to act as if the future is all certain, the forthcoming election is going to be a walk in the park for them and it is all signed, sealed and delivered.
Its odd how different the attitude is.
Great sportsman are pretty finely tuned, though: there's every possibility that a different attitude would have led to him losing something that made him great (although the counter argument is Jimmy Anderson, who has changed himself a couple of time in his career and got better each time).
My view is that Crawley is not dissimilar from Gower, and if you were to slot him in at four you'd see an altogether more impressive batsman. But England already has a number 4...
Now TRUSS is my best friend
(* Civil Service will deem the Holy Trinity to be plural and impose "they".)
This is well out of control. It's behaviour Russia and China would use.