Remember how Truss’s Tories were doing before the Kwartang Budget? – politicalbetting.com

System

Remember how Truss’s Tories were doing before the Kwartang Budget? – politicalbetting.com

The incredible thing is that this poll came out less than three months ago and an enormous amount has happened in the intervening period. The same poll had Truss and Starmer level pegging on the “Best PM” question.

Read the full story here

Pro_Rata

The polling thing we should consider is that Sunak enjoys a substantial honeymoon over the Truss polling, and the wind out of that is very likely to counterbalance some of bounce back from mid term expected by the time a GE is called.

Selebian

The split of party versus headline voting intention in that table is illuminating, isn't it?

HYUFD

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

Malmesbury

kinabalu said:

MattW said:

kinabalu said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Andy_JS said:

Cookie said:

On topic - the single biggest reason to vote Tory is to keep Labour out. (The reverse is also true). I'd argue that there is less reason for potential Tory voters to want to keep Labour out than any time since 2001. Indeed, for my tastes, there is less reason to want to keep Labour out than any time since long before I could vote.
That's not to say I'm suddenly all enthusiastic about Labour. I'm still wary of their hard-left core; still suspicious of their constant clamour for more and harder lockdowns during covid, still alarmed by their wokery. But this no longer feels like the core of their offer. I would have crawled over broken glass to cast a vote to keep Jeremy Corbyn out of power. (In fact, I will tell you the lengths I went to keep Corbyn out of power: I voted for a party led by Boris Johnson.) I probably won't vote Labour, but am I motivated enough to vote to keep them out? Probably not.

I therefore don't see don't knows returning to the Tory fold in the way they have in previous elections.

My theory - which I trot out periodically - is that the size of the Tory vote at general elections is highly correlated with the scariness of the Labour Party.

This is a bit cynical. How about voting for positive reasons?

This is what I'll be seeking to do. Tories Out is strong in my breast but there will be some good stuff in the Labour manifesto for me to be enthused about. Plus I'm starting to rate Starmer quite high on the general out of 10 apolitical PMness scale. He's a 7 and climbing. This is excellent after what we've had in recent years.

Honest question: what do you expect to be there to enthuse you?

Well there's ending private school tax breaks. That's there now and, for me, very important. I'd have been sorely disappointed if they'd flunked that.

Another? I'll be looking for state direction of investment into green and infrastructure. In size. (as we used to say on the trading floor to indicate we weren't messing around)

Hmmm.

I see no prospect that messing about with Independent Schools will save any money whatsoever for the State. Even leaving aside the extra cost imposed by driving people out of the sector who can no longer afford it by missing holidays, decent cars and so on, it will still risk liquidating the support given to the state sector and students by independent schools - which itself is worth an amount not far off the alleged extra revenue.

It looks to me that his attack on independent education is a populist ideological bone that Starmer is throwing to his dogs. Childrens' education will be the collateral damage.

The Green Investment one is interesting. Will need very careful targeting. We already have a high proportion of houses insulated, for example, and almost all double glazed. And investment in green energy at scale has been in place for many years, and is policy of all parties.

He can correctly claim that the Tories have been hamstrung by ideology, but it is a minefield. One opportunity is to drive solar on housing, but even the recent growth has seen phalanxes of chancers getting into the space. A rushed Govt scheme will just tip money away, as solar panel subsidies did in 2012-14 until they were cut back.

I'm a dog, am I? Charming.

It's also worth considering that the Green investment will suffer from the usual attempts to pick solutions. Arguably, this has already happened, with the emphasis on offshore wind.

One thing that I find fairly constant in talking to politicians - they find the idea of simply setting the correct incentives and then tuning them to the results "inefficient".

So, rather than, say, offering structure tax breaks/subsidies for building zero carbon power sources with certain characteristics (reliability, environmental impact, lifespan, inherent storage etc), they want "Onshore wind - NOW", "No tidal"

Often this is based not on analysis, but who got to them last with a plausible pitch. I sold one on oil from ground nuts replacing petrol.....

SandyRentool

HYUFD said:

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

And at 20% with PeoplePolling.

Averaging around 26% (which, coincidentally, is the average of 20 and 32!)

williamglenn

Having seen some more of Ron De Santis, I've come to the conclusion that @WillG is right about his total lack of charisma.

jamesdoyle

williamglenn said:

Having seen some more of Ron De Santis, I've come to the conclusion that @WillG is right about his total lack of charisma.

The Senate GOP is worried enough about DeSantis' lack of charisma (and indeed quality) that they are pushing an alternate candidate. Unfortunately (for them), they've settled on Tim Scott from South Carolina: an ability-vacuum himself.

maxh

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

Nigelb

Musk's twitter allegedly shadow banning Ukraine accounts.

"War in Ukraine" disappearance from Twitter trends. Radical curtailment of tweets mentioning ru-aggression coverage. Users aren’t allowed to register or log into accounts with Ukrainian phone number.
@elonmusk , I wonder if will we ever see “Twitter Files” about Fall/Winter 2022?
https://twitter.com/Podolyak_M/status/1602712709061087235

Hey @elonmusk , it seems like it's no longer possible to have a Ukrainian number verify a Twitter account/two-factor authentication. Ukraine is not in your list of countries, see our screenshot.
https://twitter.com/United24media/status/1602641892264611840

Nigelb

williamglenn said:

Having seen some more of Ron De Santis, I've come to the conclusion that @WillG is right about his total lack of charisma.

And scruples.

Stuartinromford

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

And at 20% with PeoplePolling.

Averaging around 26% (which, coincidentally, is the average of 20 and 32!)

Odd thing about the Conservative polling right now- how widely spread the figures are. Random error on these polls is meant to be +/- 3 points, but we're seeing much bigger swings than that. That's also the case for successive polls by the same company.

maxh

PB brains trust - a slightly shameless (but in a good cause) appeal for info.

Our school has a very unusually high number of kids who have been through the foster system (60 or so, most schools have 5-7).

We’ve had real success putting them at the heart of our school academically through an academic mentoring programme.

We now want to build a fairly radical personal development curriculum around them so that they leave with the sorts of personal qualities that will help them thrive.

We’ve got a good plan but need some money for a pilot project to launch in September. Does anyone have contacts in a corporate foundation or similar interested in using schools to tackle disadvantage? We are looking in all the usual places and talking to the EEF, but keen to cast the net wide.

OT, I know, sorry and please ignore with my apologies if it’s not of interest.

Pro_Rata

Quick stats for Stretford & Urmston tomorrow:

GE19: 60.3 Lab / 27.5 Con
2024 prediction by EC: 69.1 / 15.4 (10.5% swing)
2022 LE aggregate result: 63.8 / 22.3

cf. Chester
EC predicted swing was 11.9%, actual by election swing was 13.6%.

So par with Chester would be around 70 / 14.

It occurs to me that Labour could try to agree the occasional early MP exit and keep a modest by-election pipeline of successful defences with sizeable anti-Tory swings over the next 2 years.

Selebian

Stuartinromford said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

And at 20% with PeoplePolling.

Averaging around 26% (which, coincidentally, is the average of 20 and 32!)

Odd thing about the Conservative polling right now- how widely spread the figures are. Random error on these polls is meant to be +/- 3 points, but we're seeing much bigger swings than that. That's also the case for successive polls by the same company.

Either things really are just all over the place on a short time scale or the criteria on which pollsters select samples are no longer reflecting voting intention (if they did to start with). So pollsters meet their quotas/reweight on samples but that process is missing some factor that is (newly?) relevant to voting intention, so the samples are in fact differing beyond the expected random error.

If the latter, there could be some big polling misses. Those pollsters that do MRP or similar may gain some insights on this. (ETA: particularly if they're willing to go fishing for associations and then test those out in new samples)

DavidL

Selebian said:

Stuartinromford said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

And at 20% with PeoplePolling.

Averaging around 26% (which, coincidentally, is the average of 20 and 32!)

Odd thing about the Conservative polling right now- how widely spread the figures are. Random error on these polls is meant to be +/- 3 points, but we're seeing much bigger swings than that. That's also the case for successive polls by the same company.

Either things really are just all over the place on a short time scale or the criteria on which pollsters select samples are no longer reflecting voting intention (if they did to start with). So pollsters meet their quotas/reweight on samples but that process is missing some factor that is (newly?) relevant to voting intention, so the samples are in fact differing beyond the expected random error.

If the latter, there could be some big polling misses. Those pollsters that do MRP or similar may gain some insights on this.

There has been both exceptional volatility and exceptional spread. At the moment the Labour lead is probably somewhere between 10 and 20%, that is a huge range with an enormous effect on the results. I do not recall a time where the differences between companies was as large as it is now. Its odd.

jamesdoyle

maxh said:

PB brains trust - a slightly shameless (but in a good cause) appeal for info.

Our school has a very unusually high number of kids who have been through the foster system (60 or so, most schools have 5-7).

We’ve had real success putting them at the heart of our school academically through an academic mentoring programme.

We now want to build a fairly radical personal development curriculum around them so that they leave with the sorts of personal qualities that will help them thrive.

We’ve got a good plan but need some money for a pilot project to launch in September. Does anyone have contacts in a corporate foundation or similar interested in using schools to tackle disadvantage? We are looking in all the usual places and talking to the EEF, but keen to cast the net wide.

OT, I know, sorry and please ignore with my apologies if it’s not of interest.

I wish you all success with this - I'm an adoptive parent, and sit on the local adoption panel, and I know how difficult navigating the education system can be for CLAs. I've got no leads for you I'm afraid, but on the other hand if you can DM me with any links to what your school is doing, and where it is, I know of quite a few people who'd be interested.

HYUFD

jamesdoyle said:

williamglenn said:

Having seen some more of Ron De Santis, I've come to the conclusion that @WillG is right about his total lack of charisma.

The Senate GOP is worried enough about DeSantis' lack of charisma (and indeed quality) that they are pushing an alternate candidate. Unfortunately (for them), they've settled on Tim Scott from South Carolina: an ability-vacuum himself.

Scott is on just 1% with Morning Consult, 7% behind even 3rd placed Pence with Republicans.


In fact if Pence can win the evangelical heavy Iowa caucuses he also has a shot

https://morningconsult.com/2024-gop-primary-election-tracker/

Nigelb

DavidL said:

Selebian said:

Stuartinromford said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

And at 20% with PeoplePolling.

Averaging around 26% (which, coincidentally, is the average of 20 and 32!)

Odd thing about the Conservative polling right now- how widely spread the figures are. Random error on these polls is meant to be +/- 3 points, but we're seeing much bigger swings than that. That's also the case for successive polls by the same company.

Either things really are just all over the place on a short time scale or the criteria on which pollsters select samples are no longer reflecting voting intention (if they did to start with). So pollsters meet their quotas/reweight on samples but that process is missing some factor that is (newly?) relevant to voting intention, so the samples are in fact differing beyond the expected random error.

If the latter, there could be some big polling misses. Those pollsters that do MRP or similar may gain some insights on this.

There has been both exceptional volatility and exceptional spread. At the moment the Labour lead is probably somewhere between 10 and 20%, that is a huge range with an enormous effect on the results. I do not recall a time where the differences between companies was as large as it is now. Its odd.

Perhaps not so odd.
I get the impression that there is a fairly large number of voters persuadable if the leader of either major party made a compelling positive case to the electorate.

That neither really is guarantees a Labour lead, but a necessarily volatile one.

kjh

maxh said:

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

What you have done is completely acceptable in my opinion.

However when there is a heated argument it is usual to end it at the end of a thread, however [again] and probably to everyone's annoyance, I have continued on the next thread if I feel someone is getting away with an outrageous reply to me which I haven't had an opportunity to respond to.

Do whatever you are happy with. People will tell you if they are unhappy and you can ignore or comply as you see fit.

MattW

jamesdoyle said:

maxh said:

PB brains trust - a slightly shameless (but in a good cause) appeal for info.

Our school has a very unusually high number of kids who have been through the foster system (60 or so, most schools have 5-7).

We’ve had real success putting them at the heart of our school academically through an academic mentoring programme.

We now want to build a fairly radical personal development curriculum around them so that they leave with the sorts of personal qualities that will help them thrive.

We’ve got a good plan but need some money for a pilot project to launch in September. Does anyone have contacts in a corporate foundation or similar interested in using schools to tackle disadvantage? We are looking in all the usual places and talking to the EEF, but keen to cast the net wide.

OT, I know, sorry and please ignore with my apologies if it’s not of interest.

I wish you all success with this - I'm an adoptive parent, and sit on the local adoption panel, and I know how difficult navigating the education system can be for CLAs. I've got no leads for you I'm afraid, but on the other hand if you can DM me with any links to what your school is doing, and where it is, I know of quite a few people who'd be interested.

Is this not the sort of institutionally innovative programme with transformative outcomes whilst being-a-model-for-others that Charles' trust would back?

Can anyone supply a link?

Nigelb

Korea's only university department teaching 'Go' faces closure

https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=341664
...To streamline itself to follow ongoing trends and demands, the school decided to merge with Myongji College in Seoul and shut down departments they deemed are low in popularity. Jang Young-soon, a professor at the university's Business Department who's been directing its planning affairs, and Samil PwC, an accounting firm that the school hired as a consultant for the merger, put the Baduk Department on the list to close for good.

The list also includes the math, physics, chemistry and philosophy departments. They are to be replaced by new programs including Global Korean Language, Global Cultural Contents, Metaverse/Game Contents, Global Beauty Design and Global K-pop...

FeersumEnjineeya

Nigelb said:

Musk's twitter allegedly shadow banning Ukraine accounts.

"War in Ukraine" disappearance from Twitter trends. Radical curtailment of tweets mentioning ru-aggression coverage. Users aren’t allowed to register or log into accounts with Ukrainian phone number.
@elonmusk , I wonder if will we ever see “Twitter Files” about Fall/Winter 2022?
https://twitter.com/Podolyak_M/status/1602712709061087235

Hey @elonmusk , it seems like it's no longer possible to have a Ukrainian number verify a Twitter account/two-factor authentication. Ukraine is not in your list of countries, see our screenshot.
https://twitter.com/United24media/status/1602641892264611840

It's hard to see what incentive Musk would have to make things difficult for Ukrainians, but perhaps the headcount cull at Twitter has eroded its defences against Russian interference?

Nigelb

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Nigelb said:

Musk's twitter allegedly shadow banning Ukraine accounts.

"War in Ukraine" disappearance from Twitter trends. Radical curtailment of tweets mentioning ru-aggression coverage. Users aren’t allowed to register or log into accounts with Ukrainian phone number.
@elonmusk , I wonder if will we ever see “Twitter Files” about Fall/Winter 2022?
https://twitter.com/Podolyak_M/status/1602712709061087235

Hey @elonmusk , it seems like it's no longer possible to have a Ukrainian number verify a Twitter account/two-factor authentication. Ukraine is not in your list of countries, see our screenshot.
https://twitter.com/United24media/status/1602641892264611840

It's hard to see what incentive Musk would have to make things difficult for Ukrainians, but perhaps the headcount cull at Twitter has eroded its defences against Russian interference?

One possible reason might be his wholesale adoption of right wing Republican prejudices.
He's already friended the anti-woke and the anti-vaxxers; an animus towards Ukraine would fit with that - and also the Hunter laptop obsession.

This is speculation to some extent - but there are reputable Ukranian posters reporting it, and equally it would be hard to see what incentive they have for that unless they think it true.

FeersumEnjineeya

Malmesbury said:

kinabalu said:

MattW said:

kinabalu said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Andy_JS said:

Cookie said:

On topic - the single biggest reason to vote Tory is to keep Labour out. (The reverse is also true). I'd argue that there is less reason for potential Tory voters to want to keep Labour out than any time since 2001. Indeed, for my tastes, there is less reason to want to keep Labour out than any time since long before I could vote.
That's not to say I'm suddenly all enthusiastic about Labour. I'm still wary of their hard-left core; still suspicious of their constant clamour for more and harder lockdowns during covid, still alarmed by their wokery. But this no longer feels like the core of their offer. I would have crawled over broken glass to cast a vote to keep Jeremy Corbyn out of power. (In fact, I will tell you the lengths I went to keep Corbyn out of power: I voted for a party led by Boris Johnson.) I probably won't vote Labour, but am I motivated enough to vote to keep them out? Probably not.

I therefore don't see don't knows returning to the Tory fold in the way they have in previous elections.

My theory - which I trot out periodically - is that the size of the Tory vote at general elections is highly correlated with the scariness of the Labour Party.

This is a bit cynical. How about voting for positive reasons?

This is what I'll be seeking to do. Tories Out is strong in my breast but there will be some good stuff in the Labour manifesto for me to be enthused about. Plus I'm starting to rate Starmer quite high on the general out of 10 apolitical PMness scale. He's a 7 and climbing. This is excellent after what we've had in recent years.

Honest question: what do you expect to be there to enthuse you?

Well there's ending private school tax breaks. That's there now and, for me, very important. I'd have been sorely disappointed if they'd flunked that.

Another? I'll be looking for state direction of investment into green and infrastructure. In size. (as we used to say on the trading floor to indicate we weren't messing around)

Hmmm.

I see no prospect that messing about with Independent Schools will save any money whatsoever for the State. Even leaving aside the extra cost imposed by driving people out of the sector who can no longer afford it by missing holidays, decent cars and so on, it will still risk liquidating the support given to the state sector and students by independent schools - which itself is worth an amount not far off the alleged extra revenue.

It looks to me that his attack on independent education is a populist ideological bone that Starmer is throwing to his dogs. Childrens' education will be the collateral damage.

The Green Investment one is interesting. Will need very careful targeting. We already have a high proportion of houses insulated, for example, and almost all double glazed. And investment in green energy at scale has been in place for many years, and is policy of all parties.

He can correctly claim that the Tories have been hamstrung by ideology, but it is a minefield. One opportunity is to drive solar on housing, but even the recent growth has seen phalanxes of chancers getting into the space. A rushed Govt scheme will just tip money away, as solar panel subsidies did in 2012-14 until they were cut back.

I'm a dog, am I? Charming.

It's also worth considering that the Green investment will suffer from the usual attempts to pick solutions. Arguably, this has already happened, with the emphasis on offshore wind.

One thing that I find fairly constant in talking to politicians - they find the idea of simply setting the correct incentives and then tuning them to the results "inefficient".

So, rather than, say, offering structure tax breaks/subsidies for building zero carbon power sources with certain characteristics (reliability, environmental impact, lifespan, inherent storage etc), they want "Onshore wind - NOW", "No tidal"

Often this is based not on analysis, but who got to them last with a plausible pitch. I sold one on oil from ground nuts replacing petrol.....

Yes, we need huge Green investment, but I hate the idea of government picking winners. What's wrong with simply winding up the tax on carbon and letting the market do the rest? The additional income could then be used to increase spending / lower taxes / reduce borrowing according to your particular flavour of politics.

Nigelb

Turkish Court sentences Istanbul mayor Ekrem Imamoglu 2 years 7 months 15 days in prison and imposed a political ban on him: Turkish media

The verdict isn’t final and lmamoglu can appeal it
https://mobile.twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1603040785573842946

For "insulting electoral officials", reportedly.

Driver

Nigelb said:

Musk's twitter allegedly shadow banning Ukraine accounts.

"War in Ukraine" disappearance from Twitter trends. Radical curtailment of tweets mentioning ru-aggression coverage. Users aren’t allowed to register or log into accounts with Ukrainian phone number.
@elonmusk , I wonder if will we ever see “Twitter Files” about Fall/Winter 2022?
https://twitter.com/Podolyak_M/status/1602712709061087235

Hey @elonmusk , it seems like it's no longer possible to have a Ukrainian number verify a Twitter account/two-factor authentication. Ukraine is not in your list of countries, see our screenshot.
https://twitter.com/United24media/status/1602641892264611840

From the replies to the second of those:

https://twitter.com/United24media/status/1602980638910550017

Andddddddd we're back in the list, thank you.

WhisperingOracle

Nigelb said:

Korea's only university department teaching 'Go' faces closure

https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=341664
...To streamline itself to follow ongoing trends and demands, the school decided to merge with Myongji College in Seoul and shut down departments they deemed are low in popularity. Jang Young-soon, a professor at the university's Business Department who's been directing its planning affairs, and Samil PwC, an accounting firm that the school hired as a consultant for the merger, put the Baduk Department on the list to close for good.

The list also includes the math, physics, chemistry and philosophy departments. They are to be replaced by new programs including Global Korean Language, Global Cultural Contents, Metaverse/Game Contents, Global Beauty Design and Global K-pop...

Re; your earlier post on the major corruption scandal in Brussels, I see that all the EU figures investigated, or under suspicion, so far, are Greek, Portugese or Italian. That won't go down too well in the Northern EU countries.

I see that it also includes that the beautiful Eva, possibly the only other beautiful female politician in Europe except Penny Mordaunt, is already languishing in a Belgian jail.

Anabobazina

Surprised we are discussing actual polling.

My understanding from recent weeks is that one poster dominates the discourse on PB by overanalysing hypothetical polls that might occur if the Tories become vastly more popular at some undefined point in the future.

Driver

Anabobazina said:

Surprised we are discussing actual polling.

My understanding from recent weeks is that one poster dominates the discourse on PB by overanalysing hypothetical polls that might occur if the Tories become vastly more popular at some undefined point in the future.

If you're going to criticise a poster, you might have the guts to name her.

LostPassword

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Malmesbury said:

kinabalu said:

MattW said:

kinabalu said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Andy_JS said:

Cookie said:

On topic - the single biggest reason to vote Tory is to keep Labour out. (The reverse is also true). I'd argue that there is less reason for potential Tory voters to want to keep Labour out than any time since 2001. Indeed, for my tastes, there is less reason to want to keep Labour out than any time since long before I could vote.
That's not to say I'm suddenly all enthusiastic about Labour. I'm still wary of their hard-left core; still suspicious of their constant clamour for more and harder lockdowns during covid, still alarmed by their wokery. But this no longer feels like the core of their offer. I would have crawled over broken glass to cast a vote to keep Jeremy Corbyn out of power. (In fact, I will tell you the lengths I went to keep Corbyn out of power: I voted for a party led by Boris Johnson.) I probably won't vote Labour, but am I motivated enough to vote to keep them out? Probably not.

I therefore don't see don't knows returning to the Tory fold in the way they have in previous elections.

My theory - which I trot out periodically - is that the size of the Tory vote at general elections is highly correlated with the scariness of the Labour Party.

This is a bit cynical. How about voting for positive reasons?

This is what I'll be seeking to do. Tories Out is strong in my breast but there will be some good stuff in the Labour manifesto for me to be enthused about. Plus I'm starting to rate Starmer quite high on the general out of 10 apolitical PMness scale. He's a 7 and climbing. This is excellent after what we've had in recent years.

Honest question: what do you expect to be there to enthuse you?

Well there's ending private school tax breaks. That's there now and, for me, very important. I'd have been sorely disappointed if they'd flunked that.

Another? I'll be looking for state direction of investment into green and infrastructure. In size. (as we used to say on the trading floor to indicate we weren't messing around)

Hmmm.

I see no prospect that messing about with Independent Schools will save any money whatsoever for the State. Even leaving aside the extra cost imposed by driving people out of the sector who can no longer afford it by missing holidays, decent cars and so on, it will still risk liquidating the support given to the state sector and students by independent schools - which itself is worth an amount not far off the alleged extra revenue.

It looks to me that his attack on independent education is a populist ideological bone that Starmer is throwing to his dogs. Childrens' education will be the collateral damage.

The Green Investment one is interesting. Will need very careful targeting. We already have a high proportion of houses insulated, for example, and almost all double glazed. And investment in green energy at scale has been in place for many years, and is policy of all parties.

He can correctly claim that the Tories have been hamstrung by ideology, but it is a minefield. One opportunity is to drive solar on housing, but even the recent growth has seen phalanxes of chancers getting into the space. A rushed Govt scheme will just tip money away, as solar panel subsidies did in 2012-14 until they were cut back.

I'm a dog, am I? Charming.

It's also worth considering that the Green investment will suffer from the usual attempts to pick solutions. Arguably, this has already happened, with the emphasis on offshore wind.

One thing that I find fairly constant in talking to politicians - they find the idea of simply setting the correct incentives and then tuning them to the results "inefficient".

So, rather than, say, offering structure tax breaks/subsidies for building zero carbon power sources with certain characteristics (reliability, environmental impact, lifespan, inherent storage etc), they want "Onshore wind - NOW", "No tidal"

Often this is based not on analysis, but who got to them last with a plausible pitch. I sold one on oil from ground nuts replacing petrol.....

Yes, we need huge Green investment, but I hate the idea of government picking winners. What's wrong with simply winding up the tax on carbon and letting the market do the rest? The additional income could then be used to increase spending / lower taxes / reduce borrowing according to your particular flavour of politics.

I wouldn't use carbon tax income to increase spending or cut taxes, because it would create a fiscal problem when use of carbon is reduced.

James Hansen proposed disbursing all the proceeds of a carbon tax to the citizens of a country on at an equal rate per head. This then creates an inventive for citizens to invest in new technology, or to make personal lifestyle changes, and receive more as a dividend from the carbon tax than they spend on the tax themselves.

Chris

Is it just me, or has Dominic Raab's hair turned white overnight, à la Marie Antoinette?

Selebian

Chris said:

Is it just me, or has Dominic Raab's hair turned white overnight, à la Marie Antoinette?

Frost? (the weather thing, not the Lord)

Or Brexit induced shortages of Just For Men?

WhisperingOracle

Dominic Raab - rugby forward meets estate agent meets party ideologue.

SandyRentool

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Malmesbury said:

kinabalu said:

MattW said:

kinabalu said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Andy_JS said:

Cookie said:

On topic - the single biggest reason to vote Tory is to keep Labour out. (The reverse is also true). I'd argue that there is less reason for potential Tory voters to want to keep Labour out than any time since 2001. Indeed, for my tastes, there is less reason to want to keep Labour out than any time since long before I could vote.
That's not to say I'm suddenly all enthusiastic about Labour. I'm still wary of their hard-left core; still suspicious of their constant clamour for more and harder lockdowns during covid, still alarmed by their wokery. But this no longer feels like the core of their offer. I would have crawled over broken glass to cast a vote to keep Jeremy Corbyn out of power. (In fact, I will tell you the lengths I went to keep Corbyn out of power: I voted for a party led by Boris Johnson.) I probably won't vote Labour, but am I motivated enough to vote to keep them out? Probably not.

I therefore don't see don't knows returning to the Tory fold in the way they have in previous elections.

My theory - which I trot out periodically - is that the size of the Tory vote at general elections is highly correlated with the scariness of the Labour Party.

This is a bit cynical. How about voting for positive reasons?

This is what I'll be seeking to do. Tories Out is strong in my breast but there will be some good stuff in the Labour manifesto for me to be enthused about. Plus I'm starting to rate Starmer quite high on the general out of 10 apolitical PMness scale. He's a 7 and climbing. This is excellent after what we've had in recent years.

Honest question: what do you expect to be there to enthuse you?

Well there's ending private school tax breaks. That's there now and, for me, very important. I'd have been sorely disappointed if they'd flunked that.

Another? I'll be looking for state direction of investment into green and infrastructure. In size. (as we used to say on the trading floor to indicate we weren't messing around)

Hmmm.

I see no prospect that messing about with Independent Schools will save any money whatsoever for the State. Even leaving aside the extra cost imposed by driving people out of the sector who can no longer afford it by missing holidays, decent cars and so on, it will still risk liquidating the support given to the state sector and students by independent schools - which itself is worth an amount not far off the alleged extra revenue.

It looks to me that his attack on independent education is a populist ideological bone that Starmer is throwing to his dogs. Childrens' education will be the collateral damage.

The Green Investment one is interesting. Will need very careful targeting. We already have a high proportion of houses insulated, for example, and almost all double glazed. And investment in green energy at scale has been in place for many years, and is policy of all parties.

He can correctly claim that the Tories have been hamstrung by ideology, but it is a minefield. One opportunity is to drive solar on housing, but even the recent growth has seen phalanxes of chancers getting into the space. A rushed Govt scheme will just tip money away, as solar panel subsidies did in 2012-14 until they were cut back.

I'm a dog, am I? Charming.

It's also worth considering that the Green investment will suffer from the usual attempts to pick solutions. Arguably, this has already happened, with the emphasis on offshore wind.

One thing that I find fairly constant in talking to politicians - they find the idea of simply setting the correct incentives and then tuning them to the results "inefficient".

So, rather than, say, offering structure tax breaks/subsidies for building zero carbon power sources with certain characteristics (reliability, environmental impact, lifespan, inherent storage etc), they want "Onshore wind - NOW", "No tidal"

Often this is based not on analysis, but who got to them last with a plausible pitch. I sold one on oil from ground nuts replacing petrol.....

Yes, we need huge Green investment, but I hate the idea of government picking winners. What's wrong with simply winding up the tax on carbon and letting the market do the rest? The additional income could then be used to increase spending / lower taxes / reduce borrowing according to your particular flavour of politics.

If you just up the carbon tax, industry shuts down and moves abroad - "carbon leakage".

Selebian

kjh said:

maxh said:

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

What you have done is completely acceptable in my opinion.

However when there is a heated argument it is usual to end it at the end of a thread, however [again] and probably to everyone's annoyance, I have continued on the next thread if I feel someone is getting away with an outrageous reply to me which I haven't had an opportunity to respond to.

Do whatever you are happy with. People will tell you if they are unhappy and you can ignore or comply as you see fit.

I also try to comment on the new thread topic before/soon after an 'FPT' comment. Seems a bit rude to the thread header writer to ignore it completely and just continue some other debate.

Like everyone else, I'm happy to go off topic for most of the thread, but some acknowledgement of the new header seems, well, polite.

Selebian

Nigelb said:

Korea's only university department teaching 'Go' faces closure

https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=341664
...To streamline itself to follow ongoing trends and demands, the school decided to merge with Myongji College in Seoul and shut down departments they deemed are low in popularity. Jang Young-soon, a professor at the university's Business Department who's been directing its planning affairs, and Samil PwC, an accounting firm that the school hired as a consultant for the merger, put the Baduk Department on the list to close for good.

The list also includes the math, physics, chemistry and philosophy departments. They are to be replaced by new programs including Global Korean Language, Global Cultural Contents, Metaverse/Game Contents, Global Beauty Design and Global K-pop...

PwC? What's that quote: knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing?

Chris

Stuartinromford said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

And at 20% with PeoplePolling.

Averaging around 26% (which, coincidentally, is the average of 20 and 32!)

Odd thing about the Conservative polling right now- how widely spread the figures are. Random error on these polls is meant to be +/- 3 points, but we're seeing much bigger swings than that. That's also the case for successive polls by the same company.

Presumably the difference is due to the fact that they are sampling, and/or trying to correct for errors in sampling, in different ways.

If by "swings" you mean big variations from month to month from the same source, perhaps it's a red flag. If you mean variations from poll to poll from different sources, it can be a red flag for one or the other, but if anyone could tell which tbey would make a fortune!

SandyRentool

Selebian said:

kjh said:

maxh said:

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

What you have done is completely acceptable in my opinion.

However when there is a heated argument it is usual to end it at the end of a thread, however [again] and probably to everyone's annoyance, I have continued on the next thread if I feel someone is getting away with an outrageous reply to me which I haven't had an opportunity to respond to.

Do whatever you are happy with. People will tell you if they are unhappy and you can ignore or comply as you see fit.

I also try to comment on the new thread topic before/soon after an 'FPT' comment. Seems a bit rude to the thread header writer to ignore it completely and just continue some other debate.

Like everyone else, I'm happy to go off topic for most of the thread, but some acknowledgement of the new header seems, well, polite.

That would require everyone to read the thread header. Which seems anathema to some.

turbotubbs

SandyRentool said:

Selebian said:

kjh said:

maxh said:

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

What you have done is completely acceptable in my opinion.

However when there is a heated argument it is usual to end it at the end of a thread, however [again] and probably to everyone's annoyance, I have continued on the next thread if I feel someone is getting away with an outrageous reply to me which I haven't had an opportunity to respond to.

Do whatever you are happy with. People will tell you if they are unhappy and you can ignore or comply as you see fit.

I also try to comment on the new thread topic before/soon after an 'FPT' comment. Seems a bit rude to the thread header writer to ignore it completely and just continue some other debate.

Like everyone else, I'm happy to go off topic for most of the thread, but some acknowledgement of the new header seems, well, polite.

That would require everyone to read the thread header. Which seems anathema to some.

Some blogs etc have unthreaded threads - just place holders for the BTL comments. I don't think we need that here, but yes its good to have some regard for what is posted as the header.

Driver

turbotubbs said:

SandyRentool said:

Selebian said:

kjh said:

maxh said:

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

What you have done is completely acceptable in my opinion.

However when there is a heated argument it is usual to end it at the end of a thread, however [again] and probably to everyone's annoyance, I have continued on the next thread if I feel someone is getting away with an outrageous reply to me which I haven't had an opportunity to respond to.

Do whatever you are happy with. People will tell you if they are unhappy and you can ignore or comply as you see fit.

I also try to comment on the new thread topic before/soon after an 'FPT' comment. Seems a bit rude to the thread header writer to ignore it completely and just continue some other debate.

Like everyone else, I'm happy to go off topic for most of the thread, but some acknowledgement of the new header seems, well, polite.

That would require everyone to read the thread header. Which seems anathema to some.

Some blogs etc have unthreaded threads - just place holders for the BTL comments. I don't think we need that here, but yes its good to have some regard for what is posted as the header.

It has happened here in the past, but in more recent times there's always been something to write about.

TheScreamingEagles

Driver said:

turbotubbs said:

SandyRentool said:

Selebian said:

kjh said:

maxh said:

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

What you have done is completely acceptable in my opinion.

However when there is a heated argument it is usual to end it at the end of a thread, however [again] and probably to everyone's annoyance, I have continued on the next thread if I feel someone is getting away with an outrageous reply to me which I haven't had an opportunity to respond to.

Do whatever you are happy with. People will tell you if they are unhappy and you can ignore or comply as you see fit.

I also try to comment on the new thread topic before/soon after an 'FPT' comment. Seems a bit rude to the thread header writer to ignore it completely and just continue some other debate.

Like everyone else, I'm happy to go off topic for most of the thread, but some acknowledgement of the new header seems, well, polite.

That would require everyone to read the thread header. Which seems anathema to some.

Some blogs etc have unthreaded threads - just place holders for the BTL comments. I don't think we need that here, but yes its good to have some regard for what is posted as the header.

It has happened here in the past, but in more recent times there's always been something to write about.

Usually happened when Mike or myself were busy.

Now if we're busy we'll just put up a thread with a tweet or two.

WhisperingOracle

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

Chris

If threads were really about the initial post they wouldn't immediately die as soon as a new thread started.

Cookie

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

People won't be feeling the cost of heating their house in December until February or March.

WhisperingOracle

I suppose so, but surely people are also aware of the increased cost that they will be facing and will be coming up.

I wonder if the tub-thumping immigration rhetoric is having an effect too, and why Bozo has seen an opportunity to come back with it today.

Nigelb

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

The beauty of Eva Kaili ?

Nigelb

Remarkably, 30 of those rescued alive this morning were pulled from the water:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/14/uk-coastguard-responds-to-small-boat-incident-in-channel-search-and-rescue

That must have been very fast work.

Mexicanpete

Anabobazina said:

Surprised we are discussing actual polling.

My understanding from recent weeks is that one poster dominates the discourse on PB by overanalysing hypothetical polls that might occur if the Tories become vastly more popular at some undefined point in the future.

Hats off to her though. She has captured the narrative and simultaneously cheered the PB Tory contingent on the basis of very limited data.

WhisperingOracle

Nigelb said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

The beauty of Eva Kaili ?

The shockingly beautiful but apparently sadly corrupt vice-president of the EU parliament, who was arrested today, if I have the story right.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-parliament-expel-vice-president-eva-kaili/

Nigelb

WhisperingOracle said:

Nigelb said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

The beauty of Eva Kaili ?

The shockingly beautiful but apparently sadly corrupt vice-president of the EU parliament, who was arrested today, I think.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-parliament-expel-vice-president-eva-kaili/

"MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic..."

MattW

Nigelb said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Nigelb said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

The beauty of Eva Kaili ?

The shockingly beautiful but apparently sadly corrupt vice-president of the EU parliament, who was arrested today, I think.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-parliament-expel-vice-president-eva-kaili/

"MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic..."

"The lawmakers voted with an overwhelming majority of 625 in favor and one against."

Which one was that? Did Eva have a vote from jail by proxy?

SandyRentool

Cookie said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

People won't be feeling the cost of heating their house in December until February or March.

Some folk have pre-payment meters.

MattW

maxh said:

FPT (I see people saying they try not to do this - I’m still new here - why is this a bad thing?)

Northern_Al said:

Ghedebrav said:

maxh said:

Ghedebrav said:

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Ghedebrav said:

Andy_JS said:

"Highly addictive smartphones are destroying teenagers – we need to ban them now
It becomes clearer by the day that the damn things make kids sadder, lonelier and more inclined to end their precious young lives
Allison Pearson" (£)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2022/12/13/highly-addictive-smartphones-destroying-teenagers-need-ban/

Imagine if they hadn't had them through lockdown though?

Allison Pearson is 62 - so approx PB demographic.
Her expertise on the subject of teenagers is probably as limited as is ours.

I am 61 and still have a teenage son. I am not completely sure about generalising on that basis. However, never being one to resist a challenge:

Smart phones are like alcohol. Over use can clearly have deleterious effects but for the vast majority they are a great addition adding to both the quality and sociability of life.

They join the long list of items/activities which plainly do damage and where no solution lies in any of: forbidding, banning, allowing, compelling, discouraging, age discriminating, taxing, shouting, legislating, doing something or doing nothing.

I vaguely recall being told not to watch too much TV when I were a lad. Now of course families watching TV together is seen as a wholesome, healthy activity, whereas smaller screens...

Still hoping to one day meet someone with square eyes (or indeed anyone who's face did 'stay like that' when the wind changed).

My parents (who were fairly cultured by
South Yorkshire standards) used to think I read too much and should have been out
running about with my mates fishing for bullheads or finding porn under bushes. O tempora, o mores.

As someone who is vehemently anti smart phones for teenagers (and who has direct albeit anecdotal evidence of their impact on teenagers as a teacher) Ghebredav and Topping you both make decent points.

It’s genuinely hard to know where the trade off is between the obvious benefits and increasingly obvious drawbacks of this tech for teenagers.

But we feel very strongly as a society about limiting other addictive behaviour to those considered adults. It seems logical to do the same with smartphones for the simple reason that currently we are reinforcing addictive pathways in the brain for a generation of smelly teens.

Are they banned in your school? I'm generally quite relaxed about youngsters having smartphones, but it's fairly clear to me that they shouldn't be allowed in school, any more than you'd be allowed to whip out a Game Boy in the classroom back in ye oldene dayes.

(Spurious insight here from my partner being a secondary teacher.)

There's millions of adults who seem to me to be just as addicted to their smartphones as teenagers. So if there's a problem, I don't think we're setting a very good example.

Andy I agree (including me) but the difference is that adult brains are less malleable so the smartphone addiction isn’t as damaging (imo)

I think that the level of mobile phone usage in motor vehicles goes on the other side - adults are very prone to phone addiction.

The data shows that mobile phone usage in motor vehicles is in the same risk league as drunk driving, so I don't understand why they do it unless some sort of addiction is involved. Especially when a phone-mount to put it in and save their licences costs around a tenner.

I think we may be turning the corner on this one, however, due to the increasing ubiquity of cameras in vehicles, and policing projects such as Operation SNAP.

NickyBreakspear

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

There is a swing back to the Conservatives, based on average of polls each month, but still down on the September and August averages.

August - C 31.7, L 40.5, LD 11.8, SNP 4.4, G 5.7, R 3.4
September - C 30.1, L 43.6, LD 10.3, SNP 4.4, G 5.5, R 2.9
October - C 23.6, L 51.6, LD 9.6, SNP 4.1, G 4.6, R 3.6
November - C 26.2, L 47.8, LD 9.0, SNP 4.1, G 4.8, R 5.1
December - C 27.4, L 46.7, LD 9.3, SNP 3.6, G 4.8, R 5.6

So comparing December and August (the conservative interegnum) C are down 4, L up 6, LD down 2.5, SNP down 0.8, G down 1 and R up 2.2. So a shift of votes from LD and G (SNP?) to L with C going to R and L. This is ignoring don't knows etc.

Chris

WhisperingOracle said:

Nigelb said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

The beauty of Eva Kaili ?

The shockingly beautiful but apparently sadly corrupt vice-president of the EU parliament...

Blimey. If you were talking about a man, everyone would be saying how sexist you were.

Stuartinromford

WhisperingOracle said:

I suppose so, but surely people are also aware of the increased cost that they will be facing and will be coming up.

I wonder if the tub-thumping immigration rhetoric is having an effect too, and why Bozo has seen an opportunity to come back with it today.

It's not that long ago we were all mumbling about how mild it was and how little heating we had had on so far. That's helped a lot. The next really nasty surprise is when the government support runs out for most of us.

MattW

Selebian said:

Chris said:

Is it just me, or has Dominic Raab's hair turned white overnight, à la Marie Antoinette?

Frost? (the weather thing, not the Lord)

Or Brexit induced shortages of Just For Men?

Wasn't Just for Men a 1970s / 1980s porn magazine? Why name a hair camouflage product after it? Potentially owned back then by Paul Raymond. Perhaps someone needs to publish a Revue.

(None of these being my subject area, of course.)

TheScreamingEagles

On topic, I miss the heady days of the Special Fiscal Operation, thinking Lordy, this is terrible and then getting that notification on my iPhone from The Times that the YouGov was giving Labour a 33% lead.

It was quite a call with Mike telling him about that poll.

Then the days after, confirmation that it wasn't an outlier.

MattW

Stuartinromford said:

WhisperingOracle said:

I suppose so, but surely people are also aware of the increased cost that they will be facing and will be coming up.

I wonder if the tub-thumping immigration rhetoric is having an effect too, and why Bozo has seen an opportunity to come back with it today.

It's not that long ago we were all mumbling about how mild it was and how little heating we had had on so far. That's helped a lot. The next really nasty surprise is when the government support runs out for most of us.

Mildness starts again next week, I think. 11C here next Monday. 6C Sunday. <2C until then. Plan your roofing activities accordingly.

Pro_Rata

SandyRentool said:

Cookie said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

People won't be feeling the cost of heating their house in December until February or March.

Some folk have pre-payment meters.

Really depends how proactive and stubborn they have been in managing their direct debits. A lot of DDs were hiked before the energy support scheme came in and attempt to give a 12 months forward view.

So many will be paying an estimate, fair or otherwise, of both current costs and known future increases.

So, imho, it is hitting now cost wise. What I don't know, with payment much more easy and statements all online, is how many of those not on the breadline have yet noticed the erosion of their account balances.

ohnotnow

In other deeply exciting news, the Scottish Budget statement is tomorrow. BBC has a fairly long piece about what might be in it here :

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63970775

DJ41

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, I miss the heady days of the Special Fiscal Operation, thinking Lordy, this is terrible and then getting that notification on my iPhone from The Times that the YouGov was giving Labour a 33% lead.

It was quite a call with Mike telling him about that poll.

Then the days after, confirmation that it wasn't an outlier.

"Time of great change" and "New" were getting funnelled into tens of millions of minds during those few weeks.

If the headlines had been "Queen goes rollerblading after recovering from minor cold", the Daily Mail's fulsome praise for Truss's "genuine Tory budget" may have been successful and the Tories may not have sunk so far behind Labour in the polls.

ohnotnow

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/a-ticking-time-bomb-healthcare-under-threat-across-western-europe

"For decades, western Europe’s national healthcare systems have been widely touted as among the best in the world.

But an ageing population, more long-term illnesses, a continuing recruitment and retainment crisis plus post-Covid exhaustion have combined, this winter, to create a perfect healthcare storm that is likely to get worse before it gets better."

Some interesting (to me) cross-Europe stats and comparisons in there.

turbotubbs

ohnotnow said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/a-ticking-time-bomb-healthcare-under-threat-across-western-europe

"For decades, western Europe’s national healthcare systems have been widely touted as among the best in the world.

But an ageing population, more long-term illnesses, a continuing recruitment and retainment crisis plus post-Covid exhaustion have combined, this winter, to create a perfect healthcare storm that is likely to get worse before it gets better."

Some interesting (to me) cross-Europe stats and comparisons in there.

Its something that doesn't get enough attention - many issues that we suffer in the UK are common to other countries too. Sadly, for some, trying to exceptionalize UK problems is the game.

Driver

turbotubbs said:

ohnotnow said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/a-ticking-time-bomb-healthcare-under-threat-across-western-europe

"For decades, western Europe’s national healthcare systems have been widely touted as among the best in the world.

But an ageing population, more long-term illnesses, a continuing recruitment and retainment crisis plus post-Covid exhaustion have combined, this winter, to create a perfect healthcare storm that is likely to get worse before it gets better."

Some interesting (to me) cross-Europe stats and comparisons in there.

Its something that doesn't get enough attention - many issues that we suffer in the UK are common to other countries too. Sadly, for some, trying to exceptionalize UK problems is the game.

Especially when the comparisons are with twenty-seven carefully selected European countries. Can't imagine why it happens.

Foxy

WhisperingOracle said:

Nigelb said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Away from ruminating and marvelling at the beauty of Eva Kaili, and back on topic, I'm wondering about these reduced Labour poll leads at the moment. What's causing them ? We should, as people have said, be getting higher poll leads from Labour if people are suffering with the weather and higher heating bills at the moment, which should also be shading into a general perception of struggling amid the cost of living crisis. Perhaps these effects will take time to feed through ? Or perhaps there's something different going on.

MoonRabbit I know is particularly interested in this topic, so perhaps she has something to contribute on it.

The beauty of Eva Kaili ?

The shockingly beautiful but apparently sadly corrupt vice-president of the EU parliament, who was arrested today, if I have the story right.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-parliament-expel-vice-president-eva-kaili/

Really quite outrageous to arrest corrupt politicians. Here we wrap them in Ermine and give them a fancy title.

Carnyx

MattW said:

Selebian said:

Chris said:

Is it just me, or has Dominic Raab's hair turned white overnight, à la Marie Antoinette?

Frost? (the weather thing, not the Lord)

Or Brexit induced shortages of Just For Men?

Wasn't Just for Men a 1970s / 1980s porn magazine? Why name a hair camouflage product after it? Potentially owned back then by Paul Raymond. Perhaps someone needs to publish a Revue.

(None of these being my subject area, of course.)

Men Only, surely, from very dim memories of it being flashed (so to speak) around by classmates at school?

It would be unkind to inquire if you were too busy not reading the words, so I won't.

TheScreamingEagles

Nicola Sturgeon’s husband loaned more that £100,000 to the SNP to “assist with cashflow after the Holyrood election” but failed to declare it for more than a year.

The SNP has been issued with guidance from the Electoral Commission after Peter Murrell, chief executive of the party, made a late declaration of a loan totalling £107,620 on June 20 last year.

The party partially reimbursed him in instalments of more than £20,000 in August and October last year, but the commission was not notified until August this year.

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

ohnotnow

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

Maybe it's needed to help pay for fuel for Nicola's extensive fleet of helicopters? Price of fuel these days...

Foxy

Driver said:

turbotubbs said:

ohnotnow said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/a-ticking-time-bomb-healthcare-under-threat-across-western-europe

"For decades, western Europe’s national healthcare systems have been widely touted as among the best in the world.

But an ageing population, more long-term illnesses, a continuing recruitment and retainment crisis plus post-Covid exhaustion have combined, this winter, to create a perfect healthcare storm that is likely to get worse before it gets better."

Some interesting (to me) cross-Europe stats and comparisons in there.

Its something that doesn't get enough attention - many issues that we suffer in the UK are common to other countries too. Sadly, for some, trying to exceptionalize UK problems is the game.

Especially when the comparisons are with twenty-seven carefully selected European countries. Can't imagine why it happens.

The Canadian system has been in the news too buckling under the strain.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/flu-surges-on-heels-of-rsv-covid-19-to-overwhelm-children-s-hospitals-1.6181743

Carnyx

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/parents-of-deaf-pupils-at-london-school-stage-protest-over-cuts

This might interest @dixiedean : and it is notd great news for any parent of deaf children, and, I imagine, the samde problems are appearing in other special schools. The problem here in particular seems to be that the 'ordinary' or rather non-deaf school is finding it hard to support its specialist unit.

"Specialist support for deaf children and their families has fallen to its lowest level in England in more than a decade – the result of a sustained pattern of budget cuts, according to the NDCS.

A report, published by the Consortium for Research into Deaf Education (CRIDE), shows one in five qualified teachers of the deaf posts in England have been lost since 2012, with nearly four in 10 councils seeing a decrease over the past year. Of those that survive, more than half are over 50."

Carnyx

ohnotnow said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

Maybe it's needed to help pay for fuel for Nicola's extensive fleet of helicopters? Price of fuel these days...

Doubt it. It's mythical., that fleet. Not like UKG's fleet.

Cookie

ohnotnow said:

In other deeply exciting news, the Scottish Budget statement is tomorrow. BBC has a fairly long piece about what might be in it here :

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63970775

Ooh, can I guess? Is the statement "It's all the fault of the English?"

ohnotnow

Carnyx said:

ohnotnow said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

Maybe it's needed to help pay for fuel for Nicola's extensive fleet of helicopters? Price of fuel these days...

Doubt it. It's mythical., that fleet. Not like UKG's fleet.

Next you'll be telling me her massive (secret) property portfolio and huge (secret) covid-laws-ignoring team of stylists and hairdressers were made up. Jeez.

dixiedean

Carnyx said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/parents-of-deaf-pupils-at-london-school-stage-protest-over-cuts

This might interest @dixiedean : and it is notd great news for any parent of deaf children, and, I imagine, the samde problems are appearing in other special schools. The problem here in particular seems to be that the 'ordinary' or rather non-deaf school is finding it hard to support its specialist unit.

"Specialist support for deaf children and their families has fallen to its lowest level in England in more than a decade – the result of a sustained pattern of budget cuts, according to the NDCS.

A report, published by the Consortium for Research into Deaf Education (CRIDE), shows one in five qualified teachers of the deaf posts in England have been lost since 2012, with nearly four in 10 councils seeing a decrease over the past year. Of those that survive, more than half are over 50."

It's a problem being seen across the SEN sector.
Mainstream schools can't afford the additional support, so are increasingly trying to ease pupils into the special schools.
We have an 80 pupil waiting list.
We don't have space. We've already moved our sixth form provision to a site 20 miles away.

dixiedean

DJ41 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, I miss the heady days of the Special Fiscal Operation, thinking Lordy, this is terrible and then getting that notification on my iPhone from The Times that the YouGov was giving Labour a 33% lead.

It was quite a call with Mike telling him about that poll.

Then the days after, confirmation that it wasn't an outlier.

"Time of great change" and "New" were getting funnelled into tens of millions of minds during those few weeks.

If the headlines had been "Queen goes rollerblading after recovering from minor cold", the Daily Mail's fulsome praise for Truss's "genuine Tory budget" may have been successful and the Tories may not have sunk so far behind Labour in the polls.

So the markets would have been sanguine had the Queen not died?

kle4

TheScreamingEagles said:

Nicola Sturgeon’s husband loaned more that £100,000 to the SNP to “assist with cashflow after the Holyrood election” but failed to declare it for more than a year.

The SNP has been issued with guidance from the Electoral Commission after Peter Murrell, chief executive of the party, made a late declaration of a loan totalling £107,620 on June 20 last year.

The party partially reimbursed him in instalments of more than £20,000 in August and October last year, but the commission was not notified until August this year.

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

I have always been surprised purely on potential conflict of interest grounds that a married couple can occupy the leader and chief executive positions simultaneously. It means even legitimate actions could have the appearence of impropriety.

ydoethur

dixiedean said:

Carnyx said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/14/parents-of-deaf-pupils-at-london-school-stage-protest-over-cuts

This might interest @dixiedean : and it is notd great news for any parent of deaf children, and, I imagine, the samde problems are appearing in other special schools. The problem here in particular seems to be that the 'ordinary' or rather non-deaf school is finding it hard to support its specialist unit.

"Specialist support for deaf children and their families has fallen to its lowest level in England in more than a decade – the result of a sustained pattern of budget cuts, according to the NDCS.

A report, published by the Consortium for Research into Deaf Education (CRIDE), shows one in five qualified teachers of the deaf posts in England have been lost since 2012, with nearly four in 10 councils seeing a decrease over the past year. Of those that survive, more than half are over 50."

It's a problem being seen across the SEN sector.
Mainstream schools can't afford the additional support, so are increasingly trying to ease pupils into the special schools.
We have an 80 pupil waiting list.
We don't have space. We've already moved our sixth form provision to a site 20 miles away.

A great many chickens coming home to roost there around the enormous reductions made in special provision in the 1990s and early 2000s.

Jim_Miller

Sort of on topic: If you look forward in US politics, you probably should assume that inflation will continue to ease. Would the same be true in the UK? That seems plausible to me, for a number of reasons, but I would like to see analyses from those better informed than I am.

And, if it does, would I be right to conclude that inflation easing would help the Conservatives?

(I note that the most recent UK growth figures look "normal" to me, though I have no idea how long that will last.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/281734/gdp-growth-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/ )

Malmesbury

Driver said:

Nigelb said:

Musk's twitter allegedly shadow banning Ukraine accounts.

"War in Ukraine" disappearance from Twitter trends. Radical curtailment of tweets mentioning ru-aggression coverage. Users aren’t allowed to register or log into accounts with Ukrainian phone number.
@elonmusk , I wonder if will we ever see “Twitter Files” about Fall/Winter 2022?
https://twitter.com/Podolyak_M/status/1602712709061087235

Hey @elonmusk , it seems like it's no longer possible to have a Ukrainian number verify a Twitter account/two-factor authentication. Ukraine is not in your list of countries, see our screenshot.
https://twitter.com/United24media/status/1602641892264611840

From the replies to the second of those:

https://twitter.com/United24media/status/1602980638910550017

Andddddddd we're back in the list, thank you.

Having worked with SMS verification - a problem is that the list of of phone companies round the world is an extensive one. Actually having a gateway to send SMS to *most* of them is a substantial endeavour. Usually outsourced to specialist companies. They have to setup contracts with each of them, in each country, to pay to send SMS on their networks. These contracts expire and change due to price negoiations.

There is also a significant problem in a number of countries about reliability and security - there have been a number of cases where stealing/hacking numbers to gain control of 2FA via SMS have occurred. Including with collusion with people inside the mobile networks. When this happens, the providers of the access facility to SMS often drop them until the problem is resolved to their satisfaction.

I would be extremely surprised if Twitter was running their own world wide SMS gateway. I would bet a fair sum of money that they are buying that in as a service. I have also personally dealt with cases where carriers and whole countries were dropped by the third party gateway supplier.

ydoethur

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Nicola Sturgeon’s husband loaned more that £100,000 to the SNP to “assist with cashflow after the Holyrood election” but failed to declare it for more than a year.

The SNP has been issued with guidance from the Electoral Commission after Peter Murrell, chief executive of the party, made a late declaration of a loan totalling £107,620 on June 20 last year.

The party partially reimbursed him in instalments of more than £20,000 in August and October last year, but the commission was not notified until August this year.

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

I have always been surprised purely on potential conflict of interest grounds that a married couple can occupy the leader and chief executive positions simultaneously. It means even legitimate actions could have the appearence of impropriety.

I don't think that would occur to Sturgeon because she genuinely seems to think if she's doing something then it must by definition be OK.

williamglenn

The Sun needs to up its game.

ydoethur

williamglenn said:

The Sun needs to up its game.

He's not a vegan, he just borrowed big big and lent ill.

Nigelb

Pretty sure this will hold true in humans, too.

A microbiome-dependent gut–brain pathway regulates motivation for exercise
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05525-z
Exercise exerts a wide range of beneficial effects for healthy physiology1. However, the mechanisms regulating an individual’s motivation to engage in physical activity remain incompletely understood. An important factor stimulating the engagement in both competitive and recreational exercise is the motivating pleasure derived from prolonged physical activity, which is triggered by exercise-induced neurochemical changes in the brain. Here, we report on the discovery of a gut–brain connection in mice that enhances exercise performance by augmenting dopamine signalling during physical activity. We find that microbiome-dependent production of endocannabinoid metabolites in the gut stimulates the activity of TRPV1-expressing sensory neurons and thereby elevates dopamine levels in the ventral striatum during exercise. Stimulation of this pathway improves running performance, whereas microbiome depletion, peripheral endocannabinoid receptor inhibition, ablation of spinal afferent neurons or dopamine blockade abrogate exercise capacity. These findings indicate that the rewarding properties of exercise are influenced by gut-derived interoceptive circuits and provide a microbiome-dependent explanation for interindividual variability in exercise performance. Our study also suggests that interoceptomimetic molecules that stimulate the transmission of gut-derived signals to the brain may enhance the motivation for exercise...

Foxy

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

The Sun needs to up its game.

He's not a vegan, he just borrowed big big and lent ill.

He is a has bean. Going to have a long time doing porridge.

Benpointer

DavidL said:

Selebian said:

Stuartinromford said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Tories already back to 32% with Deltapoll under Sunak

And at 20% with PeoplePolling.

Averaging around 26% (which, coincidentally, is the average of 20 and 32!)

Odd thing about the Conservative polling right now- how widely spread the figures are. Random error on these polls is meant to be +/- 3 points, but we're seeing much bigger swings than that. That's also the case for successive polls by the same company.

Either things really are just all over the place on a short time scale or the criteria on which pollsters select samples are no longer reflecting voting intention (if they did to start with). So pollsters meet their quotas/reweight on samples but that process is missing some factor that is (newly?) relevant to voting intention, so the samples are in fact differing beyond the expected random error.

If the latter, there could be some big polling misses. Those pollsters that do MRP or similar may gain some insights on this.

There has been both exceptional volatility and exceptional spread. At the moment the Labour lead is probably somewhere between 10 and 20%, that is a huge range with an enormous effect on the results. I do not recall a time where the differences between companies was as large as it is now. Its odd.

..."somewhere between 10 and 20%"?

Only if you restrict yourself to the last three polls (Lab leads of 13%, 17%, 18%). The previous five (still all taken in the last 10 days) showed leads of 27%, 21%, 24%, 20%, 20%, and 22%.

I'd make that a range of 13 to 27% and an average Labour lead of over 20%.

Driver

Cookie said:

ohnotnow said:

In other deeply exciting news, the Scottish Budget statement is tomorrow. BBC has a fairly long piece about what might be in it here :

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63970775

Ooh, can I guess? Is the statement "It's all the fault of the English?"

"Westminster", please.

Malmesbury

LostPassword said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Malmesbury said:

kinabalu said:

MattW said:

kinabalu said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Andy_JS said:

Cookie said:

On topic - the single biggest reason to vote Tory is to keep Labour out. (The reverse is also true). I'd argue that there is less reason for potential Tory voters to want to keep Labour out than any time since 2001. Indeed, for my tastes, there is less reason to want to keep Labour out than any time since long before I could vote.
That's not to say I'm suddenly all enthusiastic about Labour. I'm still wary of their hard-left core; still suspicious of their constant clamour for more and harder lockdowns during covid, still alarmed by their wokery. But this no longer feels like the core of their offer. I would have crawled over broken glass to cast a vote to keep Jeremy Corbyn out of power. (In fact, I will tell you the lengths I went to keep Corbyn out of power: I voted for a party led by Boris Johnson.) I probably won't vote Labour, but am I motivated enough to vote to keep them out? Probably not.

I therefore don't see don't knows returning to the Tory fold in the way they have in previous elections.

My theory - which I trot out periodically - is that the size of the Tory vote at general elections is highly correlated with the scariness of the Labour Party.

This is a bit cynical. How about voting for positive reasons?

This is what I'll be seeking to do. Tories Out is strong in my breast but there will be some good stuff in the Labour manifesto for me to be enthused about. Plus I'm starting to rate Starmer quite high on the general out of 10 apolitical PMness scale. He's a 7 and climbing. This is excellent after what we've had in recent years.

Honest question: what do you expect to be there to enthuse you?

Well there's ending private school tax breaks. That's there now and, for me, very important. I'd have been sorely disappointed if they'd flunked that.

Another? I'll be looking for state direction of investment into green and infrastructure. In size. (as we used to say on the trading floor to indicate we weren't messing around)

Hmmm.

I see no prospect that messing about with Independent Schools will save any money whatsoever for the State. Even leaving aside the extra cost imposed by driving people out of the sector who can no longer afford it by missing holidays, decent cars and so on, it will still risk liquidating the support given to the state sector and students by independent schools - which itself is worth an amount not far off the alleged extra revenue.

It looks to me that his attack on independent education is a populist ideological bone that Starmer is throwing to his dogs. Childrens' education will be the collateral damage.

The Green Investment one is interesting. Will need very careful targeting. We already have a high proportion of houses insulated, for example, and almost all double glazed. And investment in green energy at scale has been in place for many years, and is policy of all parties.

He can correctly claim that the Tories have been hamstrung by ideology, but it is a minefield. One opportunity is to drive solar on housing, but even the recent growth has seen phalanxes of chancers getting into the space. A rushed Govt scheme will just tip money away, as solar panel subsidies did in 2012-14 until they were cut back.

I'm a dog, am I? Charming.

It's also worth considering that the Green investment will suffer from the usual attempts to pick solutions. Arguably, this has already happened, with the emphasis on offshore wind.

One thing that I find fairly constant in talking to politicians - they find the idea of simply setting the correct incentives and then tuning them to the results "inefficient".

So, rather than, say, offering structure tax breaks/subsidies for building zero carbon power sources with certain characteristics (reliability, environmental impact, lifespan, inherent storage etc), they want "Onshore wind - NOW", "No tidal"

Often this is based not on analysis, but who got to them last with a plausible pitch. I sold one on oil from ground nuts replacing petrol.....

Yes, we need huge Green investment, but I hate the idea of government picking winners. What's wrong with simply winding up the tax on carbon and letting the market do the rest? The additional income could then be used to increase spending / lower taxes / reduce borrowing according to your particular flavour of politics.

I wouldn't use carbon tax income to increase spending or cut taxes, because it would create a fiscal problem when use of carbon is reduced.

James Hansen proposed disbursing all the proceeds of a carbon tax to the citizens of a country on at an equal rate per head. This then creates an inventive for citizens to invest in new technology, or to make personal lifestyle changes, and receive more as a dividend from the carbon tax than they spend on the tax themselves.

Carbon credits - producers of CO2 have to buy them. Net Zero producers can create them. So CO2producers have to buy them from the non CO2 producers. For example, a car company building EVs creates credits which are bought by ICE manufacturers.

So CO2 becomes a cost for CO2 producers and a subsidy for the the replacement technologies.

This type of scheme already exists around the world and works.

It avoids the problem of the government becoming addicted to carbon in the way that governments became addicted to nicotine.

Scott_xP

Scottish independence voting intention:

Yes: 43% (-)
No: 42% (-2)

via @YouGov, 22 - 25 Nov
Chgs. w/ Oct
https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2022/10/scottish-independence-referendum-polls-indyref2

Carnyx

ohnotnow said:

Carnyx said:

ohnotnow said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

Maybe it's needed to help pay for fuel for Nicola's extensive fleet of helicopters? Price of fuel these days...

Doubt it. It's mythical., that fleet. Not like UKG's fleet.

Next you'll be telling me her massive (secret) property portfolio and huge (secret) covid-laws-ignoring team of stylists and hairdressers were made up. Jeez.

A rather odd interpretation of her being filmed doing her hair in the mirror ...

stodge

DJ41 said:

"Time of great change" and "New" were getting funnelled into tens of millions of minds during those few weeks.

If the headlines had been "Queen goes rollerblading after recovering from minor cold", the Daily Mail's fulsome praise for Truss's "genuine Tory budget" may have been successful and the Tories may not have sunk so far behind Labour in the polls.

The fundamental misjudgement in the Truss/Kwarteng economic plan is it failed the "fairness" test. Kwarteng's proposals looked to make very rich people even richer while doing little or nothing for those in the middle (granted there was some help for the poorest).

One of the societal changes brought by the pandemic has been to accentuate this notion of "fairness". Now, that will mean different things to different people but essentially, and in crude terms, it means "if I have to feel the pain, so does everybody else". The problem with anything approaching above-inflation wage rises in the private sector is the message it sends to the public sector.

When you are offered 4% and you see someone else getting 10% exhortations to accept the 4% aren't going to butter any parsnips (to paraphrase John Major). Today's City AM for example is full of such anti-Union rhetoric but the figures continue to suggest private sector wages running ahead of public sector though I suppose this is led by wage demands in sectors with critical skill shortages.

Driver

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

The Sun needs to up its game.

He's not a vegan, he just borrowed big big and lent ill.

He is a has bean. Going to have a long time doing porridge.

You could probably say he's to'fu'ed.

ydoethur

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

The Sun needs to up its game.

He's not a vegan, he just borrowed big big and lent ill.

He is a has bean. Going to have a long time doing porridge.

He's definitely had his chips.

Nigelb

ohnotnow said:

Carnyx said:

ohnotnow said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Opposition parties have questioned why a party that makes more than £2.5 million a year in membership fees, plus more than £1 million of “short money” for its MPs at Westminster, needed a six-figure loan from its chief executive.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-lent-snp-100-000-to-help-cash-flow-bhfjlpzs6

Maybe it's needed to help pay for fuel for Nicola's extensive fleet of helicopters? Price of fuel these days...

Doubt it. It's mythical., that fleet. Not like UKG's fleet.

Next you'll be telling me her massive (secret) property portfolio and huge (secret) covid-laws-ignoring team of stylists and hairdressers were made up. Jeez.

Though apparently she's not paying rent on the large amount of space she occupies in PB heads.

MarqueeMark

williamglenn said:

The Sun needs to up its game.

They misheard. He's a depressed Vogon.

And that was a threat.

Carnyx

ydoethur said:

Foxy said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

The Sun needs to up its game.

He's not a vegan, he just borrowed big big and lent ill.

He is a has bean. Going to have a long time doing porridge.

He's definitely had his chips.

Having seen a Youtube film once about the food they serve in US prisons, I'd be depressed if I were a vegan, too.

Casino_Royale

FPT - my first instinct with any debt is to pay it off.

I couldn't wait to pay off my student loan (only £12.5k) and that didn't happen until I was 29 years old.

Despite the rhetoric about "value" and write-offs 30 years hence it would drive me silly to pay an extra 9% tax for most of my life for the sake of a 60k debt.

I'd probably prefer to add it to my mortgage or something.

carnforth

dixiedean said:

DJ41 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, I miss the heady days of the Special Fiscal Operation, thinking Lordy, this is terrible and then getting that notification on my iPhone from The Times that the YouGov was giving Labour a 33% lead.

It was quite a call with Mike telling him about that poll.

Then the days after, confirmation that it wasn't an outlier.

"Time of great change" and "New" were getting funnelled into tens of millions of minds during those few weeks.

If the headlines had been "Queen goes rollerblading after recovering from minor cold", the Daily Mail's fulsome praise for Truss's "genuine Tory budget" may have been successful and the Tories may not have sunk so far behind Labour in the polls.

So the markets would have been sanguine had the Queen not died?

Were it not for the pensions doom-loop caused by LDI, the market jitters may have passed, and Truss may have survived. We shall never know...

Driver

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - my first instinct with any debt is to pay it off.

I couldn't wait to pay off my student loan (only £12.5k) and that didn't happen until I was 29 years old.

Despite the rhetoric about "value" and write-offs 30 years hence it would drive me silly to pay an extra 9% tax for most of my life for the sake of a 60k debt.

I'd probably prefer to add it to my mortgage or something.

I see you've fallen into the politicians' trap of seeing it as a debt.

Nigelb

Leaving aside the adequacy of this particular implementation, which seems to be disputed, how long will it be before these replace price comparison websites ?

Here it is! The first ever Comcast bill negotiated 100% with A.I and LLMs. Our
@DoNotPay ChatGPT bot talks to Comcast Chat to save one of our engineers $120 a year on their Internet bill.

Will be publicly available soon and work on online forms, chat and email.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jbrowder1/status/1602353465753309195

Imagine having one you could set loose on HMRC...