David__Osland @David__Osland · 3h Much of the criticism aimed at Kwasi Kwarteng is grossly unfair. Sometimes he gets through three or four successive days without crashing the bond market even once.
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
She's taking Putin's failure in Ukraine hard I see.
To think, America used to be in the grip of such Commie-hatred that you could have Senator McCarthy grilling everybody under oath on whether they are or ever been a member of the Communist Party.
I guess we should applaud how very liberal they have become in the USA - that you can now shill for Putin's Russia and the previous President says "Way to go, girl....". Having shilled for Putin himself.
Then you have ardent supporters of the previous President who unironically fly the flag of America's sworn enemy in WWII and call themselves "Patriots".
Not just the Americans, this. Humans are bad at dividing the world into more than two groups. Time and again, you see a bogeyman declared, and anyone who opposes that bogeyman declared a friend. My enemy's enemy is not my friend, though he may be my ally. A crucial difference.
Quite an interesting little insight into Nicola Sturgeon's trans quagmire (is it a quagmire?), and the wholly self-referential nature of some elements of that lobby.
SNP equalities officer threatened to 'beat the f*** out of terfs and transphobes' in abusive tweets
1 - The chap is still in his job. 2 - He has apologised to the 'LGBTQ+ community', and not to the people he was expressing a desire to "beat the f*ck out of". “I apologise for these tweets and for any offence caused to the LGBTQ+ community and have long since deleted them.” Tweets are from late 2020.
2 is perhaps more concerning for anyone wanting to take this debate forward.
I mean people say hyperbolic stuff on their social media all the time. But also - this article claims that terfs is a "derogatory term used against women who do not recognise the gender identity of trans women" when it is actually a term that they coined for themselves and stopped liking being associated with once they all started going weird on the main online.
Would we have an issue with someone saying "I wanna beat up homophobes" especially if it was known that person was queer and had experienced abuse from homophobes? Would we have an issue with "I wanna beat up racists" if they had friends or knew a community who had just been attacked by racists? Imagine Tommy Robinson crying about people online saying "they're thugs for saying that sort of stuff about racists" and the Sun printing it.
Hate crimes against LGBT+, but especially trans people, are going through the roof. As a queer person, that makes me both scared and furious, for myself and my friends. So yeah, going on social media and being a bit mouthy is not a big deal to me.
Wow, just wow. So you have no objection to a man going on social media and threatening to beat up women, using a derogatory term for women?
I'm sorry but if instead of "terfs" it had been "fags" would you be as blasé?
Anyone who threatens to beat up women, or gay people, or anyone else is utterly disgusting and has no place being an "equalities office" two years later, especially when he's not apologised to the community he threatened to beat up.
The idea you think "terfs" are like "racists" shows something rather broken about your mindset. Yes gay people can be victims of crime and need protection. So are women too though, and crimes against women are just as serious a problem, which is what what you dismiss as "terfs" are dealing with.
TERF is not synonymous with women - again, it would be like saying "I wanna bash some racists" is a threat to women because some racists are women. Men are much more likely to care about these issues, and to be openly transphobic. At demos, whilst fronted by some women, there are mostly men in the crowds, and a lot of the membership organisations are predominantly men.
TERF is an ideology, a belief, a political view, that has evolved over time and has become radicalised. In it's beginnings I would say it was an understandable if ultimately inaccurate position; now it is an active campaign of bigotry and misinformation. The links to the far right and other conspiratorial right wing politics are well mapped. Again, I see no difference between this and "bash the fash".
I think you misunderstand the history of the term. It was coined by "trans-inclusionary" radical feminists who wanted to define themselves against those who drew a distinction between transwomen and biological women.
Sorry, it may have been coined by trans inclusive feminists, but it was not derogatory in nature and TERFs did originally accept and use that label themselves.
Two comments I would make:
1 - The expressed desire to inflict violence on political opponents is clearly beyond the pale, and I'm amazed that this individual is still in his job. Those tweets may well be criminal.
2 - I think the issue with TERF is currently used - as a demonising term for anyone who needs to be abused, rather than where it came from. Language can become derogatory in its use.
Consider, eg, "Karen", for one example.)
TERF is used, for example, of JK Rowling, who is anything but a "Radical Feminist" (which aiui is a smallish subset of the broader feminist movement).
It seems to be to be a tribal term used to avoid actually debating anything.
There is a curious phenomenon whereby incitements to violence are widely tolerated as a quirk of societal progress when they originate with the political left. However, the full force of criminal law tends to be applied when those on the political right try and do the same thing.
Biden or a younger centrist like Buttigieg is the Democrats best chance of holding the White House.
If they go for Harris or AOC or Newsom then Trump or DeSantis would see that as an election they could win on Woke
To be honest I am starting to come around to Biden running even though he is clearly too old: simply because if he doesn't there's a good chance it will be Harris vs Trump and she would lose.
Keep Trump out at all costs.
If we could move Harris to supreme court and put Buttigieg in as Veep then we have someone more far useful for the inevitable handover mid-term if Biden wins 2nd term.
Yes, if Biden wants to stand down, he needs to find a way to do it without Harris becoming the default candidate.
The best way I can think of is
1) Announce that he's running 2) The VP can't run against her own president so he ends up in a debate against a couple of oddballs and [Gutsy Outsider] 3) Underperform in Iowa or wherever, and announce that he's so impressed by [Gutsy Outsider] that he's going to stand down and endorse them. 4) Kamala has to scramble to put together a campaign but by that time she's already lost, if she can even get on the ballot
Yep, he needs to engineer a very late primary challenge by a credible alternative. Said alternative needs to be initially apologetic for standing in the first place, but work hard and gain momentum in the first couple of primaries.
That, or send Harris to the Supreme Court next year.
Are we due a retirement on the Court soon?
Sonia Sotamayor is 68, she’s probably the next Democrat to retire.
I’m sure it can be pointed out to her, that she can either go now or wait potentially ten more years of a Republican President / Senate, and look at what happened when RBG tried that…
Depending on the election results, there might be a very small window of opportunity in November and December, to effect the change, with SS standing down as soon as it’s clear the Senate will be lost.
It's a bit of a gamble. A single Dem senator gets sick or dies and they risk losing the seat to the GOP. And I doubt there would be any GOP votes for Kamala, and not necessarily enough Dem votes.
I think I'm right in saying she would need to get 51 votes, as there couldn't be a tie-breaker in those circumstances? Or could she vote on her own nomination?
Biden or a younger centrist like Buttigieg is the Democrats best chance of holding the White House.
If they go for Harris or AOC or Newsom then Trump or DeSantis would see that as an election they could win on Woke
To be honest I am starting to come around to Biden running even though he is clearly too old: simply because if he doesn't there's a good chance it will be Harris vs Trump and she would lose.
Keep Trump out at all costs.
If we could move Harris to supreme court and put Buttigieg in as Veep then we have someone more far useful for the inevitable handover mid-term if Biden wins 2nd term.
Yes, if Biden wants to stand down, he needs to find a way to do it without Harris becoming the default candidate.
The best way I can think of is
1) Announce that he's running 2) The VP can't run against her own president so he ends up in a debate against a couple of oddballs and [Gutsy Outsider] 3) Underperform in Iowa or wherever, and announce that he's so impressed by [Gutsy Outsider] that he's going to stand down and endorse them. 4) Kamala has to scramble to put together a campaign but by that time she's already lost, if she can even get on the ballot
Yep, he needs to engineer a very late primary challenge by a credible alternative. Said alternative needs to be initially apologetic for standing in the first place, but work hard and gain momentum in the first couple of primaries.
That, or send Harris to the Supreme Court next year.
Are we due a retirement on the Court soon?
Sonia Sotamayor is 68, she’s probably the next Democrat to retire.
I’m sure it can be pointed out to her, that she can either go now or wait potentially ten more years of a Republican President / Senate, and look at what happened when RBG tried that…
Depending on the election results, there might be a very small window of opportunity in November and December, to effect the change, with SS standing down as soon as it’s clear the Senate will be lost.
It's a bit of a gamble. A single Dem senator gets sick or dies and they risk losing the seat to the GOP. And I doubt there would be any GOP votes for Kamala, and not necessarily enough Dem votes.
I think I'm right in saying she would need to get 51 votes, as there couldn't be a tie-breaker in those circumstances? Or could she vote on her own nomination?
Not that it's ever been tried.
I imagine she could vote to break the tie on her own nomination. But it would look pretty shady and hackish, so you'd risk losing Manchin etc.
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
She's taking Putin's failure in Ukraine hard I see.
To think, America used to be in the grip of such Commie-hatred that you could have Senator McCarthy grilling everybody under oath on whether they are or ever been a member of the Communist Party.
I guess we should applaud how very liberal they have become in the USA - that you can now shill for Putin's Russia and the previous President says "Way to go, girl....". Having shilled for Putin himself.
Would Putin have invaded Ukraine if Trump was still President?
5/1 the incumbent in their first term. Has it ever been that low before?
We’ve never had an incumbent hit 80 in his first term before.
Gladstone ran and won here at the age of 82 in 1892. Bin Mohamad won in 2018 as is currently PM of Malaysia at the age of 92 so it's not like it hasn't been done before elsewhere.
Gladstone lost in 1892.
But, as the Unionist coalition didn't have an outright majority, he was able to return to power with the support of the Irish Home Rule party.
One of the few positives to come out of the kamikwase mini budget is that even our political classes will have learned that making up fiscal policy on the hoof is no longer acceptable to the markets. No one will be stupid enough to have a major fiscal event without OBR backing again.
One might think it remarkable that this lesson had to have been learned but there we are. There has been a real and material change in the balance of power between our elected officials and our technocrats in the latter's favour. I would guess now that the Labour government post 2024 is going to find that more than a bit of a nuisance.
No. There is an alternative argument to yours.
The government have sidelined the OBR because they are sick to death of politics where scientists tell government and MPs what to do. Surely it should be other way round, government and politicians make the decisions and decide the direction of travel - scientists and economists brought in to help realise and achieve politicians vision.
Now faced with these two arguments, which side are you really on?
So if a PM gets elected on a platform of free teleportation to be delivered to all by 2028 should we only employ scientists who promise to deliver on that, or those that say, sorry PM, you are talking nonsense.
“If you are a parent of an under 12, and if your parent (ie child’s grandparent) do childcare so you can work, you can apply to them Specified Adult Childcare Credit.
“This means they get the National Insurance years that normally go to a parent who is off work looking after children (as you are working you will usually be getting from work).
One of the few positives to come out of the kamikwase mini budget is that even our political classes will have learned that making up fiscal policy on the hoof is no longer acceptable to the markets. No one will be stupid enough to have a major fiscal event without OBR backing again.
...
Quite funny how almost the polar opposite is actually true.
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
She's taking Putin's failure in Ukraine hard I see.
To think, America used to be in the grip of such Commie-hatred that you could have Senator McCarthy grilling everybody under oath on whether they are or ever been a member of the Communist Party.
I guess we should applaud how very liberal they have become in the USA - that you can now shill for Putin's Russia and the previous President says "Way to go, girl....". Having shilled for Putin himself.
Would Putin have invaded Ukraine if Trump was still President?
Life does seem to have got very uncertain in so many spheres so quickly. It just feels like everything is broken. An overreaction, of course - but that level of unease that we have all had the best years of this century is hard to shake.
Well if you could stop willing the Actual Apocalypse, that might improve things
Grow up.
You effeminately bemoan the end of the world, then you demand we attack Putin directly. Failing to see there might be some connection between these two things
I find it interesting that we have a non stop campaign of ridicule against out own PM above the line here, but we couch anything about Biden in ludicrously diplomatic language. The fact that he might not run has nothing to do with him being 80. Many people are on great form at 80 - HMQ had a good decade more of reigning in her when she was 80. It has to do with various signs that Biden is infirm, and therefore incapable.
Biden's fine. He trips over his words and says inappropriate shit but he's always done that.
I think the Ukraine situation and Trump's continued popularity amongst the GOP has led Biden to the conclusion he should stay on as an experienced old hand in global affairs/congress jiggery pokery rather than letting Harris have a go. If the situation was more benign he'd probably call it a day.
Agree, it will be a “no time for a novice” pitch.
If he manages to navigate the Ukraine situation to a positive resolution then he could get quite a lot of kudos for that.
5/1 the incumbent in their first term. Has it ever been that low before?
We’ve never had an incumbent hit 80 in his first term before.
Gladstone ran and won here at the age of 82 in 1892. Bin Mohamad won in 2018 as is currently PM of Malaysia at the age of 92 so it's not like it hasn't been done before elsewhere.
Gladstone lost in 1892.
But, as the Unionist coalition didn't have an outright majority, he was able to return to power with the support of the Irish Home Rule party.
One of the few positives to come out of the kamikwase mini budget is that even our political classes will have learned that making up fiscal policy on the hoof is no longer acceptable to the markets. No one will be stupid enough to have a major fiscal event without OBR backing again.
One might think it remarkable that this lesson had to have been learned but there we are. There has been a real and material change in the balance of power between our elected officials and our technocrats in the latter's favour. I would guess now that the Labour government post 2024 is going to find that more than a bit of a nuisance.
No. There is an alternative argument to yours.
The government have sidelined the OBR because they are sick to death of politics where scientists tell government and MPs what to do. Surely it should be other way round, government and politicians make the decisions and decide the direction of travel - scientists and economists brought in to help realise and achieve politicians vision.
Now faced with these two arguments, which side are you really on?
But isn't that how the OBR works? The economists at the OBR don't tell the government what to do (just as the scientists during COVID never controlled what the government did). They just give independent forecasts and analyses of what the government does, information which helps the politicians and the public. If the government is running scared of the OBR, that's a problem with the government, not the OBR.
Pavel Gubarev, Russia's "DPR" figure in Donetsk, states their intent towards Ukrainians: "We aren't coming to kill you, but to convince you. But if you don't want to be convinced, we'll kill you. We'll kill as many as we have to: 1 million, 5 million, or exterminate all of you." https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1579820810751324160
Russian Human Rights Commissioner Tatiana Moskalkova on Tuesday said she has asked UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk and international human rights groups to investigate the events in Kupyansk: go.tass.ru/jGNta https://twitter.com/tassagency_en/status/1579813670946643970
Can't quite believe there is a Russian Human Rights Commissioner.
I find it interesting that we have a non stop campaign of ridicule against out own PM above the line here, but we couch anything about Biden in ludicrously diplomatic language. The fact that he might not run has nothing to do with him being 80. Many people are on great form at 80 - HMQ had a good decade more of reigning in her when she was 80. It has to do with various signs that Biden is infirm, and therefore incapable.
Perhaps since our PM is astoundingly inept, and Biden has against all expectations turned out to be rather a good President ?
That’s straightforward opinions, not diplomacy. If we thought he was senile, rather than a bit doddery, we’d say so. You’re entitled to your opinion, but it’s far from universally accepted. And in respect of Truss, niche in the extreme.
One of the few positives to come out of the kamikwase mini budget is that even our political classes will have learned that making up fiscal policy on the hoof is no longer acceptable to the markets. No one will be stupid enough to have a major fiscal event without OBR backing again.
One might think it remarkable that this lesson had to have been learned but there we are. There has been a real and material change in the balance of power between our elected officials and our technocrats in the latter's favour. I would guess now that the Labour government post 2024 is going to find that more than a bit of a nuisance.
No. There is an alternative argument to yours.
The government have sidelined the OBR because they are sick to death of politics where scientists tell government and MPs what to do. Surely it should be other way round, government and politicians make the decisions and decide the direction of travel - scientists and economists brought in to help realise and achieve politicians vision.
Now faced with these two arguments, which side are you really on?
The parameters of the OBR are to keep borrowing below a certain percentage of GDP. The Government doesn't believe that that metric should be the sole focus, and history has proven them correct. When we've raised taxes we have frequently failed to pull in the anticipated revenue. When we've exceeded growth forecasts, that's when we pull in more tax than expected. Growth is the x factor. Who is keeping tabs on growth? Who is measuring inflation? The OBR are useless in this regard.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
She's taking Putin's failure in Ukraine hard I see.
To think, America used to be in the grip of such Commie-hatred that you could have Senator McCarthy grilling everybody under oath on whether they are or ever been a member of the Communist Party.
I guess we should applaud how very liberal they have become in the USA - that you can now shill for Putin's Russia and the previous President says "Way to go, girl....". Having shilled for Putin himself.
Would Putin have invaded Ukraine if Trump was still President?
Quite an interesting little insight into Nicola Sturgeon's trans quagmire (is it a quagmire?), and the wholly self-referential nature of some elements of that lobby.
SNP equalities officer threatened to 'beat the f*** out of terfs and transphobes' in abusive tweets
1 - The chap is still in his job. 2 - He has apologised to the 'LGBTQ+ community', and not to the people he was expressing a desire to "beat the f*ck out of". “I apologise for these tweets and for any offence caused to the LGBTQ+ community and have long since deleted them.” Tweets are from late 2020.
2 is perhaps more concerning for anyone wanting to take this debate forward.
I mean people say hyperbolic stuff on their social media all the time. But also - this article claims that terfs is a "derogatory term used against women who do not recognise the gender identity of trans women" when it is actually a term that they coined for themselves and stopped liking being associated with once they all started going weird on the main online.
Would we have an issue with someone saying "I wanna beat up homophobes" especially if it was known that person was queer and had experienced abuse from homophobes? Would we have an issue with "I wanna beat up racists" if they had friends or knew a community who had just been attacked by racists? Imagine Tommy Robinson crying about people online saying "they're thugs for saying that sort of stuff about racists" and the Sun printing it.
Hate crimes against LGBT+, but especially trans people, are going through the roof. As a queer person, that makes me both scared and furious, for myself and my friends. So yeah, going on social media and being a bit mouthy is not a big deal to me.
Wow, just wow. So you have no objection to a man going on social media and threatening to beat up women, using a derogatory term for women?
I'm sorry but if instead of "terfs" it had been "fags" would you be as blasé?
Anyone who threatens to beat up women, or gay people, or anyone else is utterly disgusting and has no place being an "equalities office" two years later, especially when he's not apologised to the community he threatened to beat up.
The idea you think "terfs" are like "racists" shows something rather broken about your mindset. Yes gay people can be victims of crime and need protection. So are women too though, and crimes against women are just as serious a problem, which is what what you dismiss as "terfs" are dealing with.
TERF is not synonymous with women - again, it would be like saying "I wanna bash some racists" is a threat to women because some racists are women. Men are much more likely to care about these issues, and to be openly transphobic. At demos, whilst fronted by some women, there are mostly men in the crowds, and a lot of the membership organisations are predominantly men.
TERF is an ideology, a belief, a political view, that has evolved over time and has become radicalised. In it's beginnings I would say it was an understandable if ultimately inaccurate position; now it is an active campaign of bigotry and misinformation. The links to the far right and other conspiratorial right wing politics are well mapped. Again, I see no difference between this and "bash the fash".
I think you misunderstand the history of the term. It was coined by "trans-inclusionary" radical feminists who wanted to define themselves against those who drew a distinction between transwomen and biological women.
Sorry, it may have been coined by trans inclusive feminists, but it was not derogatory in nature and TERFs did originally accept and use that label themselves.
Two comments I would make:
1 - The expressed desire to inflict violence on political opponents is clearly beyond the pale, and I'm amazed that this individual is still in his job. Those tweets may well be criminal.
2 - I think the issue with TERF is currently used - as a demonising term for anyone who needs to be abused, rather than where it came from. Language can become derogatory in its use.
Consider, eg, "Karen", for one example.)
TERF is used, for example, of JK Rowling, who is anything but a "Radical Feminist" (which aiui is a smallish subset of the broader feminist movement).
It seems to be to be a tribal term used to avoid actually debating anything.
There is a curious phenomenon whereby incitements to violence are widely tolerated as a quirk of societal progress when they originate with the political left. However, the full force of criminal law tends to be applied when those on the political right try and do the same thing.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
50 million Kwasi/BoE IOUs for anyone who can guess..
5/1 the incumbent in their first term. Has it ever been that low before?
We’ve never had an incumbent hit 80 in his first term before.
Gladstone ran and won here at the age of 82 in 1892. Bin Mohamad won in 2018 as is currently PM of Malaysia at the age of 92 so it's not like it hasn't been done before elsewhere.
Gladstone lost in 1892.
But, as the Unionist coalition didn't have an outright majority, he was able to return to power with the support of the Irish Home Rule party.
That's a long way round to say he won
No, he lost. He was heading the Cabinet, but the Lords blocked all his reforms and his ministers spent all their time scheming against him. Bizarrely, he ended up attacking his own government over naval spending.
One of the few positives to come out of the kamikwase mini budget is that even our political classes will have learned that making up fiscal policy on the hoof is no longer acceptable to the markets. No one will be stupid enough to have a major fiscal event without OBR backing again.
One might think it remarkable that this lesson had to have been learned but there we are. There has been a real and material change in the balance of power between our elected officials and our technocrats in the latter's favour. I would guess now that the Labour government post 2024 is going to find that more than a bit of a nuisance.
No. There is an alternative argument to yours.
The government have sidelined the OBR because they are sick to death of politics where scientists tell government and MPs what to do. Surely it should be other way round, government and politicians make the decisions and decide the direction of travel - scientists and economists brought in to help realise and achieve politicians vision.
Now faced with these two arguments, which side are you really on?
The parameters of the OBR are to keep borrowing below a certain percentage of GDP. The Government doesn't believe that that metric should be the sole focus, and history has proven them correct. When we've raised taxes we have frequently failed to pull in the anticipated revenue. When we've exceeded growth forecasts, that's when we pull in more tax than expected. Growth is the x factor. Who is keeping tabs on growth? Who is measuring inflation? The OBR are useless in this regard.
The parameters of the OBR are to give forecasts and analyses. It has no power to do anything. It is not a decision making body. The government can do what it want, irrespective of what the OBR says.
5/1 the incumbent in their first term. Has it ever been that low before?
We’ve never had an incumbent hit 80 in his first term before.
Gladstone ran and won here at the age of 82 in 1892. Bin Mohamad won in 2018 as is currently PM of Malaysia at the age of 92 so it's not like it hasn't been done before elsewhere.
Gladstone lost in 1892.
But, as the Unionist coalition didn't have an outright majority, he was able to return to power with the support of the Irish Home Rule party.
That's a long way round to say he won
No, he lost. He was heading the Cabinet, but the Lords blocked all his reforms and his ministers spent all their time scheming against him. Bizarrely, he ended up attacking his own government over naval spending.
Under our system the man or woman who is the PM is the winner. Like Theresa May ! I mean the one possible arguable exception is Ramsay McDonald/Stanley Baldwin but that's about it.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
50 million Kwasi/BoE IOUs for anyone who can guess..
The Russians weren't trying to kill people. They were trying to hit infrastructure. Not sure of the point you are making?
I find it interesting that we have a non stop campaign of ridicule against out own PM above the line here, but we couch anything about Biden in ludicrously diplomatic language. The fact that he might not run has nothing to do with him being 80. Many people are on great form at 80 - HMQ had a good decade more of reigning in her when she was 80. It has to do with various signs that Biden is infirm, and therefore incapable.
Biden's fine. He trips over his words and says inappropriate shit but he's always done that.
He recently tried to talk to a dead person
He's busy trying to stop everybody getting nuked or finding out about the aliens. He shouldn't be wasting valuable time keeping track of which members of the congressional Republican party are dead.
This is the final reminder that the sequel ("The Russian Invasion of UK") to my first Ukraine article[1] will be discussed tonight in the discussion place between 7-8pm BST. Any last-minute people, shout out.
Quite an interesting little insight into Nicola Sturgeon's trans quagmire (is it a quagmire?), and the wholly self-referential nature of some elements of that lobby.
SNP equalities officer threatened to 'beat the f*** out of terfs and transphobes' in abusive tweets
1 - The chap is still in his job. 2 - He has apologised to the 'LGBTQ+ community', and not to the people he was expressing a desire to "beat the f*ck out of". “I apologise for these tweets and for any offence caused to the LGBTQ+ community and have long since deleted them.” Tweets are from late 2020.
2 is perhaps more concerning for anyone wanting to take this debate forward.
I mean people say hyperbolic stuff on their social media all the time. But also - this article claims that terfs is a "derogatory term used against women who do not recognise the gender identity of trans women" when it is actually a term that they coined for themselves and stopped liking being associated with once they all started going weird on the main online.
Would we have an issue with someone saying "I wanna beat up homophobes" especially if it was known that person was queer and had experienced abuse from homophobes? Would we have an issue with "I wanna beat up racists" if they had friends or knew a community who had just been attacked by racists? Imagine Tommy Robinson crying about people online saying "they're thugs for saying that sort of stuff about racists" and the Sun printing it.
Hate crimes against LGBT+, but especially trans people, are going through the roof. As a queer person, that makes me both scared and furious, for myself and my friends. So yeah, going on social media and being a bit mouthy is not a big deal to me.
Wow, just wow. So you have no objection to a man going on social media and threatening to beat up women, using a derogatory term for women?
I'm sorry but if instead of "terfs" it had been "fags" would you be as blasé?
Anyone who threatens to beat up women, or gay people, or anyone else is utterly disgusting and has no place being an "equalities office" two years later, especially when he's not apologised to the community he threatened to beat up.
The idea you think "terfs" are like "racists" shows something rather broken about your mindset. Yes gay people can be victims of crime and need protection. So are women too though, and crimes against women are just as serious a problem, which is what what you dismiss as "terfs" are dealing with.
TERF is not synonymous with women - again, it would be like saying "I wanna bash some racists" is a threat to women because some racists are women. Men are much more likely to care about these issues, and to be openly transphobic. At demos, whilst fronted by some women, there are mostly men in the crowds, and a lot of the membership organisations are predominantly men.
TERF is an ideology, a belief, a political view, that has evolved over time and has become radicalised. In it's beginnings I would say it was an understandable if ultimately inaccurate position; now it is an active campaign of bigotry and misinformation. The links to the far right and other conspiratorial right wing politics are well mapped. Again, I see no difference between this and "bash the fash".
I think you misunderstand the history of the term. It was coined by "trans-inclusionary" radical feminists who wanted to define themselves against those who drew a distinction between transwomen and biological women.
Sorry, it may have been coined by trans inclusive feminists, but it was not derogatory in nature and TERFs did originally accept and use that label themselves.
Two comments I would make:
1 - The expressed desire to inflict violence on political opponents is clearly beyond the pale, and I'm amazed that this individual is still in his job. Those tweets may well be criminal.
2 - I think the issue with TERF is currently used - as a demonising term for anyone who needs to be abused, rather than where it came from. Language can become derogatory in its use.
Consider, eg, "Karen", for one example.)
TERF is used, for example, of JK Rowling, who is anything but a "Radical Feminist" (which aiui is a smallish subset of the broader feminist movement).
It seems to be to be a tribal term used to avoid actually debating anything.
The nomenclature of religious strife has been repurposed for the modern age.
You find someone guilty of heresy. Then anything you do is virtuous and for the good of society. Even the good of the heretic.
See Sir Thomas Moore having someone imprisoned for the crime of being found not guilty of heresy
5/1 the incumbent in their first term. Has it ever been that low before?
We’ve never had an incumbent hit 80 in his first term before.
Gladstone ran and won here at the age of 82 in 1892. Bin Mohamad won in 2018 as is currently PM of Malaysia at the age of 92 so it's not like it hasn't been done before elsewhere.
Gladstone lost in 1892.
But, as the Unionist coalition didn't have an outright majority, he was able to return to power with the support of the Irish Home Rule party.
That's a long way round to say he won
No, he lost. He was heading the Cabinet, but the Lords blocked all his reforms and his ministers spent all their time scheming against him. Bizarrely, he ended up attacking his own government over naval spending.
Under our system the man or woman who is the PM is the winner. Like Theresa May ! I mean the one possible arguable exception is Ramsay McDonald/Stanley Baldwin but that's about it.
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
She's taking Putin's failure in Ukraine hard I see.
To think, America used to be in the grip of such Commie-hatred that you could have Senator McCarthy grilling everybody under oath on whether they are or ever been a member of the Communist Party.
I guess we should applaud how very liberal they have become in the USA - that you can now shill for Putin's Russia and the previous President says "Way to go, girl....". Having shilled for Putin himself.
Then you have ardent supporters of the previous President who unironically fly the flag of America's sworn enemy in WWII and call themselves "Patriots".
Japan?
But in any case I thought we were past "bad person supports X therefore X is also bad".
No, we have X talks approvingly of very bad people who support X, which illustrates that X is a rather unpleasant guy himself.
I find it interesting that we have a non stop campaign of ridicule against out own PM above the line here, but we couch anything about Biden in ludicrously diplomatic language. The fact that he might not run has nothing to do with him being 80. Many people are on great form at 80 - HMQ had a good decade more of reigning in her when she was 80. It has to do with various signs that Biden is infirm, and therefore incapable.
Perhaps since our PM is astoundingly inept, and Biden has against all expectations turned out to be rather a good President ?
That’s straightforward opinions, not diplomacy. If we thought he was senile, rather than a bit doddery, we’d say so. You’re entitled to your opinion, but it’s far from universally accepted. And in respect of Truss, niche in the extreme.
If he was not giving concern about his infirmity, there would be no doubts about his age. I have not come down on any side - I've seen videos about his behaviour that I felt were unfair and easily explained. However, it doesn't take away from the simple fact that the discussion is about Biden at 80, not 80 year olds in general. Pretending otherwise is ridiculously prim.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
That's not the thing that was in dispute. Everyone can see that's what they're trying to do. And, of course, you were worrying about Putin using a nuke and ridiculing those who suggested he might lob a few missiles at some civilian targets.
What is in dispute is whether we should react by giving in to this aggression. On that I still think you are very very wrong.
David__Osland @David__Osland · 3h Much of the criticism aimed at Kwasi Kwarteng is grossly unfair. Sometimes he gets through three or four successive days without crashing the bond market even once.
He didn't crash it at all, until he became Chancellor...
Dyson: The Germans were being heavily bombed for about three years, so they got very good at civil defense. Whereas in Britain we were only bombed for six months, we never really got the hang of it. It was a huge difference. It actually took ten times as many bombs to kill one person in Germany as it did to kill one person in London. That was one of the reasons why the campaign failed, that the German civil defense was just very good. You can actually save people with civil defense. Most people are unaware of that. Civil defense does work. It would also work against nuclear bombs. Of course, that is a politically unpopular view, but it happens to be true.
Kelly: Can you explain that?
Dyson: Well, most of the people who are killed in nuclear bombing are killed by blast and fire, which is sort of old-fashioned, it has nothing to do nuclear radiation. Some people die of nuclear radiation, but that’s a small number by comparison. If you are five feet underground, you are very well shielded from all of that. So most people, even in a nuclear bombing, would survive, if they are five feet underground. Of course, in Hiroshima, they didn’t have that. If the Japanese had had a couple of years, they would have learned, and probably faster than that. It’s quite unrealistic to imagine that, with good civil defense, that Hiroshima would have been so devastating.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
50 million Kwasi/BoE IOUs for anyone who can guess..
The Russians weren't trying to kill people. They were trying to hit infrastructure. Not sure of the point you are making?
I have precision strikes that minimise civilian casualties.
You have pathetic missiles that don't kill as many people as they should.
I find it interesting that we have a non stop campaign of ridicule against out own PM above the line here, but we couch anything about Biden in ludicrously diplomatic language. The fact that he might not run has nothing to do with him being 80. Many people are on great form at 80 - HMQ had a good decade more of reigning in her when she was 80. It has to do with various signs that Biden is infirm, and therefore incapable.
Biden's fine. He trips over his words and says inappropriate shit but he's always done that.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
50 million Kwasi/BoE IOUs for anyone who can guess..
The Russians weren't trying to kill people. They were trying to hit infrastructure. Not sure of the point you are making?
I have precision strikes that minimise civilian casualties.
You have pathetic missiles that don't kill as many people as they should.
Quite an interesting little insight into Nicola Sturgeon's trans quagmire (is it a quagmire?), and the wholly self-referential nature of some elements of that lobby.
SNP equalities officer threatened to 'beat the f*** out of terfs and transphobes' in abusive tweets
1 - The chap is still in his job. 2 - He has apologised to the 'LGBTQ+ community', and not to the people he was expressing a desire to "beat the f*ck out of". “I apologise for these tweets and for any offence caused to the LGBTQ+ community and have long since deleted them.” Tweets are from late 2020.
2 is perhaps more concerning for anyone wanting to take this debate forward.
I mean people say hyperbolic stuff on their social media all the time. But also - this article claims that terfs is a "derogatory term used against women who do not recognise the gender identity of trans women" when it is actually a term that they coined for themselves and stopped liking being associated with once they all started going weird on the main online.
Would we have an issue with someone saying "I wanna beat up homophobes" especially if it was known that person was queer and had experienced abuse from homophobes? Would we have an issue with "I wanna beat up racists" if they had friends or knew a community who had just been attacked by racists? Imagine Tommy Robinson crying about people online saying "they're thugs for saying that sort of stuff about racists" and the Sun printing it.
Hate crimes against LGBT+, but especially trans people, are going through the roof. As a queer person, that makes me both scared and furious, for myself and my friends. So yeah, going on social media and being a bit mouthy is not a big deal to me.
Wow, just wow. So you have no objection to a man going on social media and threatening to beat up women, using a derogatory term for women?
I'm sorry but if instead of "terfs" it had been "fags" would you be as blasé?
Anyone who threatens to beat up women, or gay people, or anyone else is utterly disgusting and has no place being an "equalities office" two years later, especially when he's not apologised to the community he threatened to beat up.
The idea you think "terfs" are like "racists" shows something rather broken about your mindset. Yes gay people can be victims of crime and need protection. So are women too though, and crimes against women are just as serious a problem, which is what what you dismiss as "terfs" are dealing with.
TERF is not synonymous with women - again, it would be like saying "I wanna bash some racists" is a threat to women because some racists are women. Men are much more likely to care about these issues, and to be openly transphobic. At demos, whilst fronted by some women, there are mostly men in the crowds, and a lot of the membership organisations are predominantly men.
TERF is an ideology, a belief, a political view, that has evolved over time and has become radicalised. In it's beginnings I would say it was an understandable if ultimately inaccurate position; now it is an active campaign of bigotry and misinformation. The links to the far right and other conspiratorial right wing politics are well mapped. Again, I see no difference between this and "bash the fash".
I think you misunderstand the history of the term. It was coined by "trans-inclusionary" radical feminists who wanted to define themselves against those who drew a distinction between transwomen and biological women.
Sorry, it may have been coined by trans inclusive feminists, but it was not derogatory in nature and TERFs did originally accept and use that label themselves.
Two comments I would make:
1 - The expressed desire to inflict violence on political opponents is clearly beyond the pale, and I'm amazed that this individual is still in his job. Those tweets may well be criminal.
2 - I think the issue with TERF is currently used - as a demonising term for anyone who needs to be abused, rather than where it came from. Language can become derogatory in its use.
Consider, eg, "Karen", for one example.)
TERF is used, for example, of JK Rowling, who is anything but a "Radical Feminist" (which aiui is a smallish subset of the broader feminist movement).
It seems to be to be a tribal term used to avoid actually debating anything.
There is a curious phenomenon whereby incitements to violence are widely tolerated as a quirk of societal progress when they originate with the political left. However, the full force of criminal law tends to be applied when those on the political right try and do the same thing.
Dyson: The Germans were being heavily bombed for about three years, so they got very good at civil defense. Whereas in Britain we were only bombed for six months, we never really got the hang of it. It was a huge difference. It actually took ten times as many bombs to kill one person in Germany as it did to kill one person in London. That was one of the reasons why the campaign failed, that the German civil defense was just very good. You can actually save people with civil defense. Most people are unaware of that. Civil defense does work. It would also work against nuclear bombs. Of course, that is a politically unpopular view, but it happens to be true.
Kelly: Can you explain that?
Dyson: Well, most of the people who are killed in nuclear bombing are killed by blast and fire, which is sort of old-fashioned, it has nothing to do nuclear radiation. Some people die of nuclear radiation, but that’s a small number by comparison. If you are five feet underground, you are very well shielded from all of that. So most people, even in a nuclear bombing, would survive, if they are five feet underground. Of course, in Hiroshima, they didn’t have that. If the Japanese had had a couple of years, they would have learned, and probably faster than that. It’s quite unrealistic to imagine that, with good civil defense, that Hiroshima would have been so devastating.
Most weapons deployed against civilian targets would likely be airburst. Anyone close enough to the hypocentre is dead whether they are underground or not. For those where its blast and fire that is the risk, then sure you can find some shelter from these.
The whole point in Protect and Survive instructing people to build a Blue Peter Home Fallout Shelter was to afford some protections against blast & fire and then from radiation - which contrary to the claim would fuck unshielded people hard if it gets to them.
The issue then of course is that you may well have a load of survivors. Who you need to feed to get them working on reconstruction. Its not as simple as "stick everyone in a bomb shelter and its fine". Its not.
Life does seem to have got very uncertain in so many spheres so quickly. It just feels like everything is broken. An overreaction, of course - but that level of unease that we have all had the best years of this century is hard to shake.
Well if you could stop willing the Actual Apocalypse, that might improve things
Grow up.
You effeminately bemoan the end of the world, then you demand we attack Putin directly. Failing to see there might be some connection between these two things
You've gone fucking nuts, like too many on here
Where have I said "we attack Putin directly"?
Go and post on the ILoveMakingShitUp site. You'd go down a storm there....
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
That's not the thing that was in dispute. Everyone can see that's what they're trying to do. And, of course, you were worrying about Putin using a nuke and ridiculing those who suggested he might lob a few missiles at some civilian targets.
What is in dispute is whether we should react by giving in to this aggression. On that I still think you are very very wrong.
Not true. Plenty of people here, yesterday, had the deluded opinion that Putin was especially targeting civilians, and aiming to kill people. Even tho, through the day, it became obvious that was not his tactic. He is targetting infrastructure, in particular
Indeed some are still under this illusion right now:
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
They weren't meant to be "deadly". They were meant to take out power and water. Whether they will succeed, and for how long, is the moot point
Dyson: The Germans were being heavily bombed for about three years, so they got very good at civil defense. Whereas in Britain we were only bombed for six months, we never really got the hang of it. It was a huge difference. It actually took ten times as many bombs to kill one person in Germany as it did to kill one person in London. That was one of the reasons why the campaign failed, that the German civil defense was just very good. You can actually save people with civil defense. Most people are unaware of that. Civil defense does work. It would also work against nuclear bombs. Of course, that is a politically unpopular view, but it happens to be true.
Kelly: Can you explain that?
Dyson: Well, most of the people who are killed in nuclear bombing are killed by blast and fire, which is sort of old-fashioned, it has nothing to do nuclear radiation. Some people die of nuclear radiation, but that’s a small number by comparison. If you are five feet underground, you are very well shielded from all of that. So most people, even in a nuclear bombing, would survive, if they are five feet underground. Of course, in Hiroshima, they didn’t have that. If the Japanese had had a couple of years, they would have learned, and probably faster than that. It’s quite unrealistic to imagine that, with good civil defense, that Hiroshima would have been so devastating.
I think its a bit creepy and an admission by Bomber Command that they wanted to kill as many men, women and children as possible . So lets not let anyone or any organisation get close again to thinking that is a suitable objective shall we?
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
She's taking Putin's failure in Ukraine hard I see.
To think, America used to be in the grip of such Commie-hatred that you could have Senator McCarthy grilling everybody under oath on whether they are or ever been a member of the Communist Party.
I guess we should applaud how very liberal they have become in the USA - that you can now shill for Putin's Russia and the previous President says "Way to go, girl....". Having shilled for Putin himself.
Then you have ardent supporters of the previous President who unironically fly the flag of America's sworn enemy in WWII and call themselves "Patriots".
Japan?
But in any case I thought we were past "bad person supports X therefore X is also bad".
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
She's taking Putin's failure in Ukraine hard I see.
To think, America used to be in the grip of such Commie-hatred that you could have Senator McCarthy grilling everybody under oath on whether they are or ever been a member of the Communist Party.
I guess we should applaud how very liberal they have become in the USA - that you can now shill for Putin's Russia and the previous President says "Way to go, girl....". Having shilled for Putin himself.
Then you have ardent supporters of the previous President who unironically fly the flag of America's sworn enemy in WWII and call themselves "Patriots".
Japan?
But in any case I thought we were past "bad person supports X therefore X is also bad".
No, not Japan.
And the comment was more about how a section of American "patriots" now identify more with America's enemies past and present, than America itself.
Give the Ukrainians their dues - the speed of repair is truly impressive. Need some of that efficiency on the pot holes near where I live.
Yesterday, the #Russian missiles left huge holes in the middle of our cities. All night long, 🇺🇦services worked to restore the damaged road connections & public services. Step by step, we’ll bring our cities to a peaceful routine.
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
50 million Kwasi/BoE IOUs for anyone who can guess..
TLDR - it's probably OK for now as long as they don't put anything too heavy on it and keep speeds down. But - it will have shortened the life of the bridge and the piers will probably need replacing fairly soon.
Is that Spaghetti Junction? General wear and tear. It'll be fine.
I went pasta Spaghetti Junction the other day.
It was all tangled up.
If you are keen on the minutiae of Spaghetti Junction, there is an 'endearing' Youtube channel called Auto Shenanigans, which has a series of vids called "Secrets of the Motorway".
The government have sidelined the OBR because they are sick to death of politics where scientists tell government and MPs what to do.
I find that sentence easier to parse if you replace the word "scientists" with "qualified people who know what they're talking about"; "government" with "people like Liz Truss, Kwazi Kwarteng and Jacob Rees-Mogg"; and "MPs" with "people like Michael Fabricant, Lucy Allan and Lee Anderson".
This apparently was Putin's tactic in Aleppo. Bomb the power station, then attack it again when people go in to repair it, or rescue the wounded
I think the Russian thinking is that Ukraine hit their infrastructure (the bridge) so they are going to double down on ukraines infrastructure. All very macho and all that but an indication that wars like this get escalated (as everyone has the must win mindset) . To de-escalate there needs to be an end to so so must win or so and so must lose .That is the stuff of playground war when you are 10 . Needs some adults around the world to end this
Life does seem to have got very uncertain in so many spheres so quickly. It just feels like everything is broken. An overreaction, of course - but that level of unease that we have all had the best years of this century is hard to shake.
Well if you could stop willing the Actual Apocalypse, that might improve things
Grow up.
You effeminately bemoan the end of the world, then you demand we attack Putin directly. Failing to see there might be some connection between these two things
You've gone fucking nuts, like too many on here
Where have I said "we attack Putin directly"?
Go and post on the ILoveMakingShitUp site. You'd go down a storm there....
You're now so insane you accused me of being a "fucking appeaser" and a "Putinist shill" for saying.... "it might have been a truck"
More Royalty not following the law of the land, or rather changing it to suit their private interests.
'In 1973 the Queen dispatched her private lawyer to lobby the government to change a proposed law that would allow the public to establish who owned shares in specific companies. Her lawyer argued that disclosure of her shareholdings would be “embarrassing”.
A special exemption was inserted into the proposed law, according to an internal Whitehall document written in 2011, “to avoid a situation where for example ownership of specific shares by members of the royal family could become widely known”.
The shell company, operated by senior individuals at the Bank of England, was set up in 1977 “to hold royal investments”, according to the document.
“This vehicle, relevant trustees and investment managers and certain members of the royal family were granted an exemption from the requirement to disclose an interest in a company’s shares,” the document added.'
This apparently was Putin's tactic in Aleppo. Bomb the power station, then attack it again when people go in to repair it, or rescue the wounded
I think the Russian thinking is that Ukraine hit their infrastructure (the bridge) so they are going to double down on ukraines infrastructure. All very macho and all that but an indication that wars like this get escalated (as everyone has the must win mindset) . To de-escalate there needs to be an end to so so must win or so and so must lose .That is the stuff of playground war when you are 10 . Needs some adults around the world to end this
Well, they shouldn't look in PB. There are now very few adults on here. As you and I have both noted
Tho I disagree on the reason for this new infrastructure attack. This is a noted Russian tactic which they used in Aleppo. It's not simply a reaction to the Kerch bombing (tho that must have shaped the timing)
Apparently the Russians have been brewing this for a while
Thread by a senior research associate at the Vienna Centre for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation on @Leon ‘s armistice call. (She’s a Russia specialist.)
FPT: EU27 GDP as % of US: 87% in 2021 from 85% in 2001. UK GDP as % of US: 13% in 2021 from 16% in 2001. All of that decline has happened since 2015. Thanks to Brexit we are once again the sick man of Europe.
You can choose your dates to create whatever narrative you like. If I did 2008 to 2022 it would look rather different, as I would be cherry picking to get the maximum negative on EUR-USD.
One thing Truss is quite good on is reversing the Alastair-Campbellisation of government.
@jessicaelgot PM’s spokesman confirms today he will no longer be attending cabinet. Only ministers in the room, as per PM’s request. Under previous government, spokesman always attended in order to be able to answer questions on the discussion & for transparency.
I *broadly* agree with that... but so long as they're a non-speaking observer, doesn't it help to have the spokesperson hear any discussion and to understand any decision?
@disclosetv JUST IN - Russia adds Zuckerberg's Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, to the list of "terrorist and extremist organizations," state media reports.
We really need Putin to run out of missiles, and soon. If he doesn't this is bad
The Ukrainians are briefing that they're expecting the Russians to keep this up for about two weeks. Do you think your nerves can deal with that?
And if they are briefing 2 weeks, I assume their intelligence is telling them that is 75 percentile; it'll probably be less (but there's an outside possibility it will be a little longer).
If the Russians have any sense they will gradually reduce the intensity so they can keep it going longer.
@disclosetv JUST IN - Russia adds Zuckerberg's Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, to the list of "terrorist and extremist organizations," state media reports.
Biden or a younger centrist like Buttigieg is the Democrats best chance of holding the White House.
If they go for Harris or AOC or Newsom then Trump or DeSantis would see that as an election they could win on Woke
To be honest I am starting to come around to Biden running even though he is clearly too old: simply because if he doesn't there's a good chance it will be Harris vs Trump and she would lose.
Keep Trump out at all costs.
If we could move Harris to supreme court and put Buttigieg in as Veep then we have someone more far useful for the inevitable handover mid-term if Biden wins 2nd term.
Yes, if Biden wants to stand down, he needs to find a way to do it without Harris becoming the default candidate.
The best way I can think of is
1) Announce that he's running 2) The VP can't run against her own president so he ends up in a debate against a couple of oddballs and [Gutsy Outsider] 3) Underperform in Iowa or wherever, and announce that he's so impressed by [Gutsy Outsider] that he's going to stand down and endorse them. 4) Kamala has to scramble to put together a campaign but by that time she's already lost, if she can even get on the ballot
Yep, he needs to engineer a very late primary challenge by a credible alternative. Said alternative needs to be initially apologetic for standing in the first place, but work hard and gain momentum in the first couple of primaries.
That, or send Harris to the Supreme Court next year.
Are we due a retirement on the Court soon?
Sonia Sotamayor is 68, she’s probably the next Democrat to retire.
I’m sure it can be pointed out to her, that she can either go now or wait potentially ten more years of a Republican President / Senate, and look at what happened when RBG tried that…
Depending on the election results, there might be a very small window of opportunity in November and December, to effect the change, with SS standing down as soon as it’s clear the Senate will be lost.
It's a bit of a gamble. A single Dem senator gets sick or dies and they risk losing the seat to the GOP. And I doubt there would be any GOP votes for Kamala, and not necessarily enough Dem votes.
In the Ulternative Universe, everything is a gamble
Now, what’s Tulsi Gabbard up to? Running for something as an independent or Libertarian, or sweet-talking DeSantis and Trump to be on the ticket?
With her attack on the impeachment process, unrestrained love of Putin & Assad, the verbal diarrhoea of Right Wing Twitter talking points in her resignation statement and the American media's love of "bipartisanship" I think she is well positioned to be Trump's running mate.
I look forward to a new efflorescence of 'I'm no fan of Tulsi but' chat on PB.
Of course, there are defensive missile systems available in the West which could stop most of these attacks in their tracks (hypersonic perhaps excepted), without even getting into a debate about NATO vs Russian aircraft.
But they need to be supplied.
Germany has gotten increasingly steadfast as the war has continued:
FPT: EU27 GDP as % of US: 87% in 2021 from 85% in 2001. UK GDP as % of US: 13% in 2021 from 16% in 2001. All of that decline has happened since 2015. Thanks to Brexit we are once again the sick man of Europe.
You can choose your dates to create whatever narrative you like. If I did 2008 to 2022 it would look rather different, as I would be cherry picking to get the maximum negative on EUR-USD.
That's why you don't cherry pick years and you certainly don't take 2008, when the world was at maximum pre-GFC distortion, as your point of comparison. I chose 2001 simply because it was 20 years prior to the last data point. You could choose any year around then and get a similar result. The point is, the EU economy has broadly kept pace with the US over the last couple of decades - as did the UK, until Brexit.
@disclosetv JUST IN - Russia adds Zuckerberg's Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, to the list of "terrorist and extremist organizations," state media reports.
Thread by a senior research associate at the Vienna Centre for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation on @Leon ‘s armistice call. (She’s a Russia specialist.)
Barring fundamental changes in #Russian war aims, this won’t get us off the escalation ladder for long….
She makes good points
Especially this one:
"Side note: It should be possible to have these debates without immediately falling victim to criticism that one is wavering in support of #Ukraine, or “appeasing” #Russia.
Remarkable. Treasury cttee chair Mel Stride asks Kwarteng for assurance on the floor of the House that he will "reach out" across the party ahead of next fiscal statement to avoid repeating markets fiasco https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1579834894527893507
I am shocked, shocked to discover perennial PB favourite Tulsi Gabbard has quite the Democratic Party.
Shocked.
Trump running mate?
Ooooooooh.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOH.
Anywhere offering a GOP running mate market?
Perhaps she wants the Republican nomination herself.
@TulsiGabbard I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are…
Thread by a senior research associate at the Vienna Centre for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation on @Leon ‘s armistice call. (She’s a Russia specialist.)
Of course, there are defensive missile systems available in the West which could stop most of these attacks in their tracks (hypersonic perhaps excepted), without even getting into a debate about NATO vs Russian aircraft.
But they need to be supplied.
Germany has gotten increasingly steadfast as the war has continued:
FPT: EU27 GDP as % of US: 87% in 2021 from 85% in 2001. UK GDP as % of US: 13% in 2021 from 16% in 2001. All of that decline has happened since 2015. Thanks to Brexit we are once again the sick man of Europe.
You can choose your dates to create whatever narrative you like. If I did 2008 to 2022 it would look rather different, as I would be cherry picking to get the maximum negative on EUR-USD.
That's why you don't cherry pick years and you certainly don't take 2008, when the world was at maximum pre-GFC distortion, as your point of comparison. I chose 2001 simply because it was 20 years prior to the last data point. You could choose any year around then and get a similar result. The point is, the EU economy has broadly kept pace with the US over the last couple of decades - as did the UK, until Brexit.
Except its not true. 2021 dodgy is data due to Covid, and different ways of reporting Covid data.
If you look at the approximately quarter of a century pre-Covid since the EEC became the EU (1993 - 2019) then the data is the polar opposite of what you claim:
France 1.323 (19%) Germany 2.071 tn (30%) Italy 1.065 tn (16% ) UK 1.061 tn (15%) Big 4 Combined 5.52 tn (80%)
2019 (Final pre-Covid year): USA $20.94 tn
France 2.716 tn (13% down 6%) Germany 3.861 tn (18% down 12%) Italy 2.005 tn (10% down 6%) UK 2.831 tn (14% down 1%) Big 4 Combined 11.413 tn (55% down 25%)
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
50 million Kwasi/BoE IOUs for anyone who can guess..
The answer is.... The New York Times of course.
Weird passive voice sort of thing should have been a huge giveaway.
Comments
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1579820383926374401
@David__Osland
·
3h
Much of the criticism aimed at Kwasi Kwarteng is grossly unfair. Sometimes he gets through three or four successive days without crashing the bond market even once.
Humans are bad at dividing the world into more than two groups. Time and again, you see a bogeyman declared, and anyone who opposes that bogeyman declared a friend. My enemy's enemy is not my friend, though he may be my ally. A crucial difference.
Not that it's ever been tried.
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-blames-us-almost-forcing-putin-invade-ukraine-1750145
Trump is now pushing for a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine
https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-believes-world-war-iii-is-a-possibility-blames-stupid-people-for-russia-ukraine-conflict-escalation-523884
But, as the Unionist coalition didn't have an outright majority, he was able to return to power with the support of the Irish Home Rule party.
Mr Lewis, on something new to me:
“If you are a parent of an under 12, and if your parent (ie child’s grandparent) do childcare so you can work, you can apply to them Specified Adult Childcare Credit.
“This means they get the National Insurance years that normally go to a parent who is off work looking after children (as you are working you will usually be getting from work).
“This can add £1000s to a state pension.”
No. Shit. Sherlocks.
2014 - Obama President, Russian invasion
2016-2020 - trump President - no invasion
2022 - Biden President - Russian version
Interpret those facts as you will
You've gone fucking nuts, like too many on here
If he manages to navigate the Ukraine situation to a positive resolution then he could get quite a lot of kudos for that.
Pavel Gubarev, Russia's "DPR" figure in Donetsk, states their intent towards Ukrainians: "We aren't coming to kill you, but to convince you. But if you don't want to be convinced, we'll kill you. We'll kill as many as we have to: 1 million, 5 million, or exterminate all of you."
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1579820810751324160
Russian Human Rights Commissioner Tatiana Moskalkova on Tuesday said she has asked UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk and international human rights groups to investigate the events in Kupyansk:
go.tass.ru/jGNta
https://twitter.com/tassagency_en/status/1579813670946643970
Can't quite believe there is a Russian Human Rights Commissioner.
That’s straightforward opinions, not diplomacy. If we thought he was senile, rather than a bit doddery, we’d say so.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but it’s far from universally accepted. And in respect of Truss, niche in the extreme.
"F*ck.
Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes.
Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1579822468973268992?s=20&t=UdTwe-FIopZ9s6smY77KwA
The state of the Antonivskyi bridge in occupied Kherson.
👌✅
Or should we say ❌ no Russians driving there anymore.
https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1579818087544913920
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
50 million Kwasi/BoE IOUs for anyone who can guess..
"Huge fire after the missile attack on an object in Kyiv.
#Ukraine #Ukrainewar #UkraineRussiaWar #Kyiv #Crimea"
https://twitter.com/Chronology22/status/1579789917668147201?s=20&t=UdTwe-FIopZ9s6smY77KwA
Notes
[1] https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2022/05/02/why-ukraine-was-particularly-vulnerable/
You find someone guilty of heresy. Then anything you do is virtuous and for the good of society. Even the good of the heretic.
See Sir Thomas Moore having someone imprisoned for the crime of being found not guilty of heresy
Lord Derby also?
And no, not Japan.
What is in dispute is whether we should react by giving in to this aggression. On that I still think you are very very wrong.
Dear Westminster chums, sorry to be boring on about bonds again, but this isn’t very good. https://twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1579825573513560064/photo/1
But no, that doesn't look good for a speedy retreat...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEe76a9hZZA
Dyson: The Germans were being heavily bombed for about three years, so they got very good at civil defense. Whereas in Britain we were only bombed for six months, we never really got the hang of it. It was a huge difference. It actually took ten times as many bombs to kill one person in Germany as it did to kill one person in London. That was one of the reasons why the campaign failed, that the German civil defense was just very good. You can actually save people with civil defense. Most people are unaware of that. Civil defense does work. It would also work against nuclear bombs. Of course, that is a politically unpopular view, but it happens to be true.
Kelly: Can you explain that?
Dyson: Well, most of the people who are killed in nuclear bombing are killed by blast and fire, which is sort of old-fashioned, it has nothing to do nuclear radiation. Some people die of nuclear radiation, but that’s a small number by comparison. If you are five feet underground, you are very well shielded from all of that. So most people, even in a nuclear bombing, would survive, if they are five feet underground. Of course, in Hiroshima, they didn’t have that. If the Japanese had had a couple of years, they would have learned, and probably faster than that. It’s quite unrealistic to imagine that, with good civil defense, that Hiroshima would have been so devastating.
Mohamed El-Erian, Chief Economic Adviser at Allianz, tells @Sarah_Montague that spending cuts would cause ‘significant damage’ to the markets.
#BBCWATO https://twitter.com/BBCWorldatOne/status/1579817218442862592/video/1
You have pathetic missiles that don't kill as many people as they should.
It's one of those irregular verbs.
It was all tangled up.
The whole point in Protect and Survive instructing people to build a Blue Peter Home Fallout Shelter was to afford some protections against blast & fire and then from radiation - which contrary to the claim would fuck unshielded people hard if it gets to them.
The issue then of course is that you may well have a load of survivors. Who you need to feed to get them working on reconstruction. Its not as simple as "stick everyone in a bomb shelter and its fine". Its not.
Go and post on the ILoveMakingShitUp site. You'd go down a storm there....
Indeed some are still under this illusion right now:
@Pulpstar
"The Russian missile attacks that killed at least 19 people across Ukraine on Monday were wide-ranging, but they were not as deadly as they could have been. That has renewed questions over the quality of Russia’s weapons."
They weren't meant to be "deadly". They were meant to take out power and water. Whether they will succeed, and for how long, is the moot point
And the comment was more about how a section of American "patriots" now identify more with America's enemies past and present, than America itself.
They indicate that the repeated shelling took place when rescuers were working at the site. According to preliminary info, six people were injured."
https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1579810295681527808?s=20&t=OmLIUt1Hj9UOheAqq_Pdig
This apparently was Putin's tactic in Aleppo. Bomb the power station, then attack it again when people go in to repair it, or rescue the wounded
Yesterday, the #Russian missiles left huge holes in the middle of our cities. All night long, 🇺🇦services worked to restore the damaged road connections & public services. Step by step, we’ll bring our cities to a peaceful routine.
📸Borys Filatov, Kyrylo Tymoshenko, Getty Images
https://twitter.com/MFA_Ukraine/status/1579830263315828736
https://theconversation.com/crimean-bridge-blast-experts-assess-the-damage-192161
TLDR - it's probably OK for now as long as they don't put anything too heavy on it and keep speeds down. But - it will have shortened the life of the bridge and the piers will probably need replacing fairly soon.
Here's the one about Gravelly Hill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PyC0APp4c8
And about the lower end of the M1, and why it stops at Staples Corner, and what happened to M1 Junction 3.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF-aODgWmto
To de-escalate there needs to be an end to so so must win or so and so must lose .That is the stuff of playground war when you are 10 . Needs some adults around the world to end this
More Royalty not following the law of the land, or rather changing it to suit their private interests.
'In 1973 the Queen dispatched her private lawyer to lobby the government to change a proposed law that would allow the public to establish who owned shares in specific companies. Her lawyer argued that disclosure of her shareholdings would be “embarrassing”.
A special exemption was inserted into the proposed law, according to an internal Whitehall document written in 2011, “to avoid a situation where for example ownership of specific shares by members of the royal family could become widely known”.
The shell company, operated by senior individuals at the Bank of England, was set up in 1977 “to hold royal investments”, according to the document.
“This vehicle, relevant trustees and investment managers and certain members of the royal family were granted an exemption from the requirement to disclose an interest in a company’s shares,” the document added.'
Tho I disagree on the reason for this new infrastructure attack. This is a noted Russian tactic which they used in Aleppo. It's not simply a reaction to the Kerch bombing (tho that must have shaped the timing)
Apparently the Russians have been brewing this for a while
(She’s a Russia specialist.)
https://twitter.com/HannaNotte/status/1579811167945773058
@AlexGabuev argues for crisis diplomacy toward an “armistice that will freeze the front lines” in #Ukraine, should nuclear risks become intolerable
Barring fundamental changes in #Russian war aims, this won’t get us off the escalation ladder for long….
If the Russians have any sense they will gradually reduce the intensity so they can keep it going longer.
https://www.politico.eu/article/scholz-urge-putin-withdraw-troop-germany-face-call-send-ukraine-tank-russia-war/
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/21/putin-must-recognize-he-cannot-win-ukraine-war-olaf-scholz-says-at-un.html
Especially this one:
"Side note: It should be possible to have these debates without immediately falling victim to criticism that one is wavering in support of #Ukraine, or “appeasing” #Russia.
@drfranksauer
said this eloquently with a view to the German debate: https://twitter.com/drfranksauer/status/1579077052535570433 (3/15)"
https://twitter.com/HannaNotte/status/1579811172957949954?s=20&t=BiX7aK3bM0Ayd4g5WURtqw
https://twitter.com/estwebber/status/1579834894527893507
Tulsi Gabbard is the Glenn Greenwald of Jill Steins.
https://twitter.com/Wolfrum/status/1579814536097730563
Ru will use a ceasefire to regroup and then start to push again. Ukr would have lost momentum. They dump Putin, then maybe we can talk.
Large chunks of the political class want help for Ukraine. Another large chunk finds the idea of anything like a conflict with Russia disturbing.
Scholz seems to be oscillating between positions on this - oking weapons shipments, then delaying them.
If you look at the approximately quarter of a century pre-Covid since the EEC became the EU (1993 - 2019) then the data is the polar opposite of what you claim: