Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Not a cat in hells chance of the UK Government getting £80 billion in taxation from the North Sea now they are driving investment out.
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
So, they’ll soon be getting relocated from the British Museum to the Scottish one will they?
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Rather odd to blame London for that. Public spending per head is massively higher in Scotland than in England. So if Scotland is mired in poverty and England is not, the place to look would seem to be the Scottish government. My understanding is that it is rather cheaper to get oil out of the Arabian sands than out of the North Sea. The mere presence of oil isn't a ticket to wealth.
The day there are no foodbanks in London is the day the original tweet might obtain some meaning.
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Not a cat in hells chance of the UK Government getting £80 billion in taxation from the North Sea now they are driving investment out.
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
It's not just the absolute level*, it's the fact that the government changes the rules all the time.
* Which is not that ridiculous by international standards
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
Might be a statement of the flipping obvious, but didn’t he spent his childhood and youth learning the trade of carpentry? Not sure they handed out degrees for such a piffling vocational job, but I imagine it consumed most of his waking hours nevertheless.
Lol, Lord Elgin was Scottish (or Scotch as he's described at the the scene of the crime).
Thank you for continuing the Michelle Mone/Andy Murray meme:
Good deeds = British Bad deeds = Scottish
Yet again having to point out posters being disingenuous about what they have said. Your meme (which was rather funny I will admit) specifically quoted 'the English'. So it is perfectly acceptable for others to reply pointing out how many Scots were also involved in nicking other bits of the world.
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
You're a Christian on here? What are you the rest of the time?
A Christian. A lover. And a poet. 😇
I was responding to how kjh phrased it.
Do you believe Divvie?
As I said to my recently deceased pal ante mortem, the only thing I believe is that we all go to the same place. I did not add as it didn't seem the time or place that most likely that place is black unknowing oblivion, though I suspect he may have agreed with me.
I shall be most most disappointed if I end up in some hierachic spiritual twatfest as envisaged by the likes of pretendy Christians like HYUFD.
I think twatfest comes from a different belief system than Christianity, and even then you have to do some pretty extreme things to get it.
I think many or most pre-Christian Middle Eastern or East Mediterranean religions held that twatfest was for pretty much everyone. The idea of being able to avoid twatfest was one of Christianity's big selling points.
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Not a cat in hells chance of the UK Government getting £80 billion in taxation from the North Sea now they are driving investment out.
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
They should switch their support from the Tories to the Yes movement. We’ll only take 65% of their profit. Everybody wins.
(Except the English Exchequer, but they don’t count.)
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
You're a Christian on here? What are you the rest of the time?
A Christian. A lover. And a poet. 😇
I was responding to how kjh phrased it.
Do you believe Divvie?
As I said to my recently deceased pal ante mortem, the only thing I believe is that we all go to the same place. I did not add as it didn't seem the time or place that most likely that place is black unknowing oblivion, though I suspect he may have agreed with me.
I shall be most most disappointed if I end up in some hierachic spiritual twatfest as envisaged by the likes of pretendy Christians like HYUFD.
I think twatfest comes from a different belief system than Christianity, and even then you have to do some pretty extreme things to get it.
I think many or most pre-Christian Middle Eastern or East Mediterranean religions held that twatfest was for pretty much everyone. The idea of being able to avoid twatfest was one of Christianity's big selling points.
Rishi Sunak should mimic Maggie Thatcher and come up to the next General Assembly and give the ministers a sermon on the merits of heaven. They can compare it with the earthly delights of the Tory Twatfest.
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
In which case lots will clear off and become telephone sanitisers in accordance with Conservative philosophy of the free market.
That's the penny that still hasn't dropped yet. The strikes are just accelerating the inevitable unless pay rises to meet market expectations or labour supply is increased by other means.
There is no magic nurse tree.
If you get rid of the university degree requirement there probably is, there's no practical benefit of nurses going to university.
Although presumably that is a longer term solution: nurses without University degrees will still need training, and presumably they previously got some of that training on university nursing courses.
I work in one of the big UK university departments training nurses and midwives (although I'm little involved myself - occasional lecture - and not employed for that at all). The course is very hands-on, mostly practical training, including placements and the vast majority taught by qualified clinicians rather than traditional academics.
There's a bit on research methods, critical appraisal etc (the bit I sometimes contribute to) which I do think has some value. Obviously more important for doctors, but nurses sometimes end up in charge of care decisions, particularly those in primary care - helps to prevent them being taken in by and pushing evidence-free bollocks such as homeopathy. We also teach midwives and there's definitely a need there for an understanding of what has evidence and what does not!
But, whatever views on the above paragraph, a non-university training course would look very similar to what we deliver.
That certain PB contributors pronounce definitively on subjects about which they know Jack shit comes as no surprise… this time it’s the content of nursing degrees. That the same voices argue vehemently to deny nurses and police officers the prestige of having a degree to their name, whilst defending independent schools to the hilt, says it all. Keep the working man and woman in their place.
The main effect of turning various forms of training into degrees has been to harden the barriers to progress for those without a degree.
In many areas, getting a job without a degree has become impossible. The previous avenues into various skills and trades for the non-degree possessing, have vanished.
So 50% of the population is classified, for life as “low value”.
Yes, and at the same time getting a degree has become much, much, much more expensive. I'd say the 'everything needs a degree' approach is the 'keeping working man and woman in their place' approach, rather than the reverse.
Indeed, it's quite a warped world view that suggests the working man/woman needs to have this £45k certificate to get on in life and that professions should be off limits to those who can't afford it.
It’s a brilliant world view if you a certain kind of university vice chancellor. You have a guaranteed, increasing supply of debt peons.
You get them in to your vast campus, then they spend money on the over priced accommodation you’ve partnered up with a big firm to build and own. Then they eat and drink at the bars on the vast campus.
You have to work hard to keep increasing the ratio of money that stay on your campus - but hey, nothing is for free.
The other thing we need to do is reverse the degree requirement for nursing. Labour introduced it as a way of meeting their 50% target for students going ti university after 6th form. There's no practical need for it and all it has done is restrict labour supply and leave nurses with £40k in debt when they start work.
I'm not sure of this. Much of the nursing degree is undertaken in clinical settings - they are learning on the job. Nursing is also a much more highly skilled role than the day of Carry On Nurse etc. I generally tend to think of having better educated staff being a good thing.
Perhaps understanding and utilization of appropriate staff is the key? I am certain that a ward will have a mix of staffing - some able to do more complex things, some less so. There is no one 'nurse' role.
Arguably we should go the other way. Want to be a doctor? First you have to train and serve as a nurse for three years.
Medic training is also highly clinical. There is an emphasis on IPE (inter professional education) including with pharmacists. The system of training isn't broken, the salaries are.
Certainly no shortage of people who want to be doctors...
6 figures average salary for GPs who are partners in medical practices and good pensions of course
Barely 6 figures. You're being misleading. You need also to allow for the fact that they are effectively cimpany directors. The *salary* for salaried GPs is much less, 2/3 I think.
Average salary of a GP partner is £121k, close to top 1% of earners in the UK
Company directors? I have wet myself!!!!!! GPs? The safest job in the entire Known Universe? You will be saying University Chancellors are CEOs next. Oh, yes, public sector fat cats have been making that ludicrous comparison for years too.
Personally I would love it if GPs really were the equivalent of company directors. Those who give a shit service could go bust, but no, it never happens. Doctors in UK are completely featherbedded, in particular GPs. The media always give them an easy ride including the bloodsucking self interest group known as the BMA. Ask why there isn't sufficient for nurses? Partly because doctors are greedily earning too much and drawing years of final salary pension schemes that the nation can't afford. Yes there really are fat cat doctors who take zero career risk and get rewarded very very handsomely. Will the media question it? No because they are pathetically supine if someone has the often honorific title of Dr in front of their name.
I know quite a lot of doctors from my university days.
The ones who went the GP route have relatively well paid, relaxing lives.
Those who went the hospital route did not. They worked (and often still work) long hours, needed to constantly move around the country to climb within their specialty, and had much lower incomes for much of their careers.
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Not a cat in hells chance of the UK Government getting £80 billion in taxation from the North Sea now they are driving investment out.
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
And of course the anti fossil fuel Sturgeon government would whack it with even higher tax
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Not a cat in hells chance of the UK Government getting £80 billion in taxation from the North Sea now they are driving investment out.
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
It's not just the absolute level*, it's the fact that the government changes the rules all the time.
* Which is not that ridiculous by international standards
It is fairly ridiculous. If you have a Production Sharing Contract, where the terms are generally respected for 25 or 30 years because they are fair at the start, constant changes to the tax regime by successive UK Chancellors are very much second best.
(The PSC is based on feudal Indonesian rice-growing arrangements. In poor years, the workers have enough to survive; in bumper years, they share some of the abundance, but the landowners get the bulk. Most adhere to it. Notoriously, not so much the Algerians. As I was told "A contract is just a pause in our negotiations....")
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Not a cat in hells chance of the UK Government getting £80 billion in taxation from the North Sea now they are driving investment out.
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
It's not just the absolute level*, it's the fact that the government changes the rules all the time.
* Which is not that ridiculous by international standards
I agree with you about the continually changes which has been a long term gripe of mine on here. But yes, the UK levels are now higher than just about every other country in the world. They are even higher than Norway which is saying something!
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
In which case lots will clear off and become telephone sanitisers in accordance with Conservative philosophy of the free market.
That's the penny that still hasn't dropped yet. The strikes are just accelerating the inevitable unless pay rises to meet market expectations or labour supply is increased by other means.
There is no magic nurse tree.
If you get rid of the university degree requirement there probably is, there's no practical benefit of nurses going to university.
Although presumably that is a longer term solution: nurses without University degrees will still need training, and presumably they previously got some of that training on university nursing courses.
I work in one of the big UK university departments training nurses and midwives (although I'm little involved myself - occasional lecture - and not employed for that at all). The course is very hands-on, mostly practical training, including placements and the vast majority taught by qualified clinicians rather than traditional academics.
There's a bit on research methods, critical appraisal etc (the bit I sometimes contribute to) which I do think has some value. Obviously more important for doctors, but nurses sometimes end up in charge of care decisions, particularly those in primary care - helps to prevent them being taken in by and pushing evidence-free bollocks such as homeopathy. We also teach midwives and there's definitely a need there for an understanding of what has evidence and what does not!
But, whatever views on the above paragraph, a non-university training course would look very similar to what we deliver.
Which is the point of the nurse practitioner qualification still having the university degree bar. The point is that we've created an artificial limitation on who can qualify in certain professions and then there's a huge shortage of labour in them. Nursing is one of those professions where a university degree is mostly unnecessary and for those who want to go on to be nurse practitioners the degree would still be available anyway.
It's sort of like how tech industry jobs used to require a computer science degree but companies realised this was unnecessary and all they really wanted were people who could code, so anyone with 6 months in a bootcamp was able to a junior programmer job and work their way up. I have no formal qualifications for what I do, my chemistry degree has been worse than useless since I graduated, I'm just lucky it only resulted in £14k worth of debt rather than £45k as students are lumbered with now.
The degree bar for nursing is a degree in nursing. A three year degree has replaced the old system of three years training for state registration. This is different from your other example of the police, where any old degree will do with no vocational element. Now, if we look at the details for nurse training, probably the old way was better, but it's not a big thing.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
I often lift my gaze above local by-election results and have been listening to a lot of classical music in recent weeks. I have noticed the increasing femininisation of the genre - in terms of soloists and orchestra members ( but not yet conductors). Leading the charge is Katya Buniatishvili the sexy Georgian pianist. Check out her Hungarian Rhapsody by Liszt. The newest star is Maria Duenas, a Spanish violinist who is not sexy but is astonishing. Watch her Paganini Violin Concerto No. 1.
Khatia is so perfect for the dazzle and razzle of Liszt! If you find this one on YouTube, I love what’s going on with her hair - Khatia Buniatishvili - Liszt Piano Concerto no. 2 - L'Orchestre de Paris - Andrey Boreyko
Incredible performer; I love this.
I’m sure Liszt wrote his Piano concertos for audiences to enjoy showmanship and rollicking tunes, so Khatia and Liszt a match made in heaven. I think Liszt is undervalued. I remembering saying I love Les Preludes and a friend dismissed it as mere organ at a fairground music. I still disagree and think it more than that, even though I joined this thread calling Liszt music razzle and dazzle, I want to point out.
Is Liszt undervalued ? I rate his work quite highly.
The late great Claudio Arrau was a superb interpreter.
By some yes I think the Liszt piano concertos and tone poems like Les Preludes are not rated highly enough. It like them too, and think they are as good as Beethoven’s piano concertos.
There is a difference though between fields Piano concertos from the classical Period and Lists from outside it, I can feel the difference but like both types.
Maybe the difference is who and what it is written for? Like the bit in Amadeus when his friends says you won’t make any money writing requiems you need to write what the public want to come out to hear. Liszt is writing to entertain bums on seats, in classical period composers are under employ, with the security and creature comforts of that, so that shapes their output instead. And then others like Bruckner composing for God, and Mahler for himself outside both his paid job and maybe not even bothered about the bums on seats and making money from it? I think I mean you can hear the historical and money factor in the musical output.
OT SPotY nominations are out and even worse than last year.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
Going to be boring SPOTY with little betting opportunity as will be Mead. Even though Stokes have been immense, he has won it before and all the push will be for Lioness winner.
OT SPotY nominations are out and even worse than last year.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
Why? They look reasonable to me. I don't see any tokenism this time.
What’s Going to Happen to All That Money Sam Bankman-Fried Gave Politicians? The short answer is they may need to repay it.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/12/sam-bankman-fried-campaign-finance-violations-democrats-republicans-donations.html …Bankman-Fried gave the maximum possible amount to new top House Democrat Hakeem Jeffries, as did his brother Gabe Bankman-Fried. Sam Bankman-Fried also maxed out to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Sean Patrick Maloney and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, and donated to her political action committee. He donated to Rep. Ritchie Torres, too. That’s just in New York. He also maxed out to incoming House Democratic Caucus chair Pete Aguilar of California, newly the third most powerful Dem in the House.
He gave, too, to the consequential campaign arm PACs on both the House and Senate side for Democrats, including $5,000 to Team Blue PAC, the political action committee founded by Jeffries. FEC filings show three donations to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, House Democrats’ most important campaign arm, totaling $250,000. He gave repeatedly to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the senate side equivalent, and $1 million to Senate Majority PAC, the adjoining super PAC. Bankman-Fried’s PAC Protect Our Future gave $6 million to Democrats’ House Majority PAC as well. (To be clear, Republicans also got in on the action here, with the National Republican Campaign Committee, Susan Collins, and other prominent GOPers also on the take from Bankman-Fried).
Did all of that money come from FTX customer accounts? Well, we don’t know yet, and that’s the problem. “It’s going to be a bear for prosecutors to figure that out,” said Fischer. “But what they’re saying is that a portion of the contributions were made using customer funds.”…
…Are Republicans in the clear? Absolutely not. FTX’s co-CEO Ryan Salame gave $25 million to Republicans, and the FTX’s top brass routed money to Senator Mitch McConnell and Representative Kevin McCarthy, as well as $3.5 million to the GOP’s Senate Leadership Fund super PAC. Bankman-Fried has claimed that he gave just as much in dark money to the GOP as he did in registered giving to Democrats. The details of that dark money still haven’t come to light. But it’s very likely Republicans will find themselves in a similar position. Sen. John Hoeven, a North Dakota Republican, has already announced that he gave $11,600—money received from Bankman-Fried and Salame—to the Salvation Army.
Back on the blue side of the aisle, critics have rightly said that the party courted this disaster by embracing the lavish spending of an overnight billionaire. Just a few weeks after election day, the decision to accept Bankman-Fried’s involvement in Democratic campaigns has become a political liability—fueling various conspiracy theories—as well as a financial one. At best, it was a massive tactical gaffe…
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
Most of the Commonwealth now have their own heads of state anyway, the Commonwealth Secretary General is already a black woman and William has said he may not even head the Commonwealth so it alternates amongst Commonwealth heads of state
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Yes. That's right (ish). North Sea Oil was used as a magic money tree.
But unless Nicola Sturgeon is possessed of a nation-sized tardis, that observation is fatuous. If North Sea oil money had been invested in a Norwegian-style sovereign wealth fund, there'd be a big pile of cash for either the British or Scottish government but it wasn't so there isn't, and independence now will not magically create one.
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
Might be a statement of the flipping obvious, but didn’t he spent his childhood and youth learning the trade of carpentry? Not sure they handed out degrees for such a piffling vocational job, but I imagine it consumed most of his waking hours nevertheless.
Most of it was made up centuries afterwards, and they didn't then see the point in inventing boring bits.
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
Not a cat in hells chance of the UK Government getting £80 billion in taxation from the North Sea now they are driving investment out.
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
And of course the anti fossil fuel Sturgeon government would whack it with even higher tax
Except the SNP is in the remarkable position of demanding an independent nation underpinned by hydrocarbons - whilst banning any further developments of discovered fields. They deserve to be pointed at and laughed. As indeed they are, by the international hydrocarbons industry.
OT SPotY nominations are out and even worse than last year.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
Why? They look reasonable to me. I don't see any tokenism this time.
And they seemed to have picked sports people with actual personalities, this time.
I remember when they gave it to Nigel Mansell… great driver, but no one would accuse him of having a bubbling presence in the room….
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
Can you point to any historical text which says that?
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
OT SPotY nominations are out and even worse than last year.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
Why? They look reasonable to me. I don't see any tokenism this time.
OT SPotY nominations are out and even worse than last year.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
Why? They look reasonable to me. I don't see any tokenism this time.
And they seemed to have picked sports people with actual personalities, this time.
I remember when they gave it to Nigel Mansell… great driver, but no one would accuse him of having a bubbling presence in the room….
What's the history behind the "personality" angle? Why was it never simply just sports person of the year award?
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
You're a Christian on here? What are you the rest of the time?
A Christian. A lover. And a poet. 😇
I was responding to how kjh phrased it.
Do you believe Divvie?
As I said to my recently deceased pal ante mortem, the only thing I believe is that we all go to the same place. I did not add as it didn't seem the time or place that most likely that place is black unknowing oblivion, though I suspect he may have agreed with me.
I shall be most most disappointed if I end up in some hierachic spiritual twatfest as envisaged by the likes of pretendy Christians like HYUFD.
If you end up in the same post-mortem twatfest as Franco Fan then you’ll have mightily displeased St Peter.
Mr. Dickson, that does rather neglect the fact that they wanted to be half-in, half-out, having the kudos of royalty and the personal income/additional freedom of celebrity.
They wanted fewer responsibilities and more perks and were, unsurprisingly, refused.
Going to be boring SPOTY with little betting opportunity as will be Mead. Even though Stokes have been immense, he has won it before and all the push will be for Lioness winner.
OT SPotY nominations are out and even worse than last year.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
Why? They look reasonable to me. I don't see any tokenism this time.
And they seemed to have picked sports people with actual personalities, this time.
I remember when they gave it to Nigel Mansell… great driver, but no one would accuse him of having a bubbling presence in the room….
This again?
"Personality" was always only the name of the award, not a criterion for judging it.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
I'm surprised he gets tolerated on here TBH. Malc is anti-English in a mad way. @StuartDickson just calmly explains his view that English people are essentially scum. He doesn't even have the defence of insanity that Malc has.
"What is very clear is that people are likely to die when in normal circumstances they would have received help earlier."
"People who lose a close family member could blame the government for a long time."
1. It's of zero importance for the next general election.
2. This has been set up. The RCN is not full of pétroleuses and versions of La Pasionaria.
3. Bashing the nurses brings home to other waged workers how tough the government is.
4. It's preparatory. Do any nurses have a problem with doing and thinking exactly as they're told, however crazy what they're supposed to believe actually is? Then step forward. Thanks. Now get out.
5. Arrangements for army involvement in the state health service will be further tested and established.
6. Note that many rail services were pulled even though the railworkers weren't actually on strike at the time. Bit of a giveaway there. Doubtless "experts" will say whatever happened was totally to be expected, as usual.
Prediction on the basis of the above analysis: there will be no last-minute or early "we've agreed to call off the strikes and go to arbitration instead, or otherwise seek a compromise". Nurse and other worker disobedience will be seen to be crushed.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
Can you point to any historical text which says that?
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
I'm surprised he gets tolerated on here TBH. Malc is anti-English in a mad way. @StuartDickson just calmly explains his view that English people are essentially scum. He doesn't even have the defence of insanity that Malc has.
Ach, l don’t want @StuartDickson driven off the site. He’s sometimes informative with unexpected opinions, and his blatant Anglophobic racism does more harm to his cause than anything else
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
In which case lots will clear off and become telephone sanitisers in accordance with Conservative philosophy of the free market.
That's the penny that still hasn't dropped yet. The strikes are just accelerating the inevitable unless pay rises to meet market expectations or labour supply is increased by other means.
There is no magic nurse tree.
If you get rid of the university degree requirement there probably is, there's no practical benefit of nurses going to university.
Although presumably that is a longer term solution: nurses without University degrees will still need training, and presumably they previously got some of that training on university nursing courses.
I work in one of the big UK university departments training nurses and midwives (although I'm little involved myself - occasional lecture - and not employed for that at all). The course is very hands-on, mostly practical training, including placements and the vast majority taught by qualified clinicians rather than traditional academics.
There's a bit on research methods, critical appraisal etc (the bit I sometimes contribute to) which I do think has some value. Obviously more important for doctors, but nurses sometimes end up in charge of care decisions, particularly those in primary care - helps to prevent them being taken in by and pushing evidence-free bollocks such as homeopathy. We also teach midwives and there's definitely a need there for an understanding of what has evidence and what does not!
But, whatever views on the above paragraph, a non-university training course would look very similar to what we deliver.
Which is the point of the nurse practitioner qualification still having the university degree bar. The point is that we've created an artificial limitation on who can qualify in certain professions and then there's a huge shortage of labour in them. Nursing is one of those professions where a university degree is mostly unnecessary and for those who want to go on to be nurse practitioners the degree would still be available anyway.
It's sort of like how tech industry jobs used to require a computer science degree but companies realised this was unnecessary and all they really wanted were people who could code, so anyone with 6 months in a bootcamp was able to a junior programmer job and work their way up. I have no formal qualifications for what I do, my chemistry degree has been worse than useless since I graduated, I'm just lucky it only resulted in £14k worth of debt rather than £45k as students are lumbered with now.
You do also get some people entering nursing who are only doing so because it's now seen as potentially a higher status/skill job with the degree (which will be useful to open other doors* even if turning away from nursing) and the enhanced roles etc.
Can you not still enter nursing without a degree? I thought there were still routes?
*that it's needed/perceived to be needed to open other doors is of course part of a problem that we both agree on
There are degree apprenticeships and nursing associate + shortened degree pathways.
And to any teenagers watching, remember that Student Loans are designed not to be loans really. They are meant to function as a graduate tax without being labelled as a tax. Most people will never get near paying them off, the interest rate isn't real interest and the write-offs are a design feature, not a bug.
Ignorant people making scary claims to further political points are much more of a problem.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
I'm surprised he gets tolerated on here TBH. Malc is anti-English in a mad way. @StuartDickson just calmly explains his view that English people are essentially scum. He doesn't even have the defence of insanity that Malc has.
Ach, l don’t want @StuartDickson driven off the site. He’s sometimes informative with unexpected opinions, and his blatant Anglophobic racism does more harm to his cause than anything else
Why are you so full of hate Stuart? Why do you hate other people so much?
Well it's not his fault that he has to hear English b**tards who aren't from his village, speaking with their b**tard English accents all the time, as if brave Scotsmen didn't exist.
(Just trying to shed some light on the hate-filled nationalist mentality.)
Mr. Dickson, that does rather neglect the fact that they wanted to be half-in, half-out, having the kudos of royalty and the personal income/additional freedom of celebrity.
They wanted fewer responsibilities and more perks and were, unsurprisingly, refused.
Failure of negotiation. Instead of both parties partially winning, both lost.
The immovability of the monarchy is seen as a strength. It isn’t.
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
You know that 19% is a bargaining mechanism starting point. Everyone does.
The Government would be better off accomodating the NHS workers and if union destruction is their manifesto, crush the rail workers.
I note all the PB Conservatives are falling into their 1980s Thatcherite line over this issue. Remember though, Thatcher picked and chose her battles.
Modern Tories often misunderstand what Margaret Thatcher was really like. She loved to come across as gung-ho, but in reality she was a careful and cunning strategist. She picked her fights extremely carefully. She would never have gone head to head with nurses FFS.
Interesting as well that she was opposed to two of the most contentious post-Thatcher privatisations - that of the Royal Mail and the Railways.
She was also opposed, quite rightly, to the establishment of the National Lottery. She fought it for years, against a skilled internal campaign within her own party. She quite rightly saw that it was a cynical tool for removing vast sums of cash from poor and stupid people in order to suppress the tax bills of people that could easily afford to fund public services.
The original purpose of the Lottery money was to fund things that were traditionally outside government spending - the classic was the “save this work of art for the nation”, a case of which caused John Major to put his support behind it, IIRC.
There have been a number of attempts to divert more money from it to “schools and hospitals spending”, since. Mostly beaten iff. The government still takes the vast majority of the ticket price in tax, though.
The other point is that due to globalisation, other countries lotteries were beginning to make their mark in the U.K. - the huge Spanish lottery, for example. One argument for the U.K. lottery was that it would dominate the U.K. market, keeping the money and regulation in the U.K.
From total ticket sales of £8,090.7 million in the year ending 31 March 2022:
£1,911.8 million was raised for National Lottery projects £4,612.3 million was paid to players in prizes £970.9 million went to the Government in Lottery Duty £265.4 million was earned by retailers in commission
Mr. Dickson, that does rather neglect the fact that they wanted to be half-in, half-out, having the kudos of royalty and the personal income/additional freedom of celebrity.
They wanted fewer responsibilities and more perks and were, unsurprisingly, refused.
Most sane human beings would want all-out of the cruel royalist goldfish bowl, where your family and personal life is under permanent scrutiny.
They wanted a compromise. The family could have negotiated rather than being pig headed about it. Cutting their noses off to spite their faces.
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
Might be a statement of the flipping obvious, but didn’t he spent his childhood and youth learning the trade of carpentry? Not sure they handed out degrees for such a piffling vocational job, but I imagine it consumed most of his waking hours nevertheless.
A theologian friend of mine suggests that Jesus's role as a carpenter was emphasised to show his role on the very bottom rung of Judean society. The way the Judean economy worked was subsistence agriculture, and only those without the means to support themselves through what they could raise had to then branch out into selling their labour elsewhere. A carpenter in today's society is quite a skilled trade, but we shouldn't assume that that was true of Jesus: he may well in practice have just been hoying lumps of wood about. It's quite likely that he was better described in today's terms as 'jobbing unskilled labourer'. I don't know how true that is. But that comes from a man who is professionally religious and has a degree in theology. His other theory - which he trots out every year - is that being born in a stable is actually quite luxurious, or at least par for the course, in ancient Palestine. Houses would have two rooms: one for the humans who lived there and one for the animals and/or guests. Basically the Holy Family were expected In Line With The Prophecy: someone had made up the spare room for them. Again, I am merely reporting someone else's theory. File under 'bloke on the internet said'.
⚠️THERMONUCLEAR BAD—Hospitals completely overwhelmed in China ever since restrictions dropped. Epidemiologist estimate >60% of 🇨🇳 & 10% of Earth’s population likely infected over next 90 days. Deaths likely in the millions—plural. This is just the start—🧵
So when China has got through this winter, buried its millions but achieved a herd immunity that three years of lockdowns and shite vaccines have prevented - is the world finally through Covid?
£80 billion in extra tax heading to Westminster in the next 6 years from North Sea oil/gas. Aberdeen should look like Dubai by now but instead it has food banks. The mishandling of Scotland’s oil wealth by London govs is one of the biggest scandals in post war European history.
True. Mrs Thatcher used oil revenues to fund irresponsible tax cuts when they should have been used to build up a sovereign fund (like they have in Norway).
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
I actually saw a bit of the Netflix doco last night (Mrs Anabob is well into the royals, loves the soap opera, fashion and the goss).
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
No it was a whingefest from their $10 million mansion in sunny California paid for by Netflix millions directed at Americans while Brits face the cold and rising cost of living. Meghan really doesn't care that much about us or the Commonwealth. She cares about becoming A list in the US, witness her squeal of delight when Beyonce tweeted her.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
Can you point to any historical text which says that?
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
No, no and << checks notes >> no
One of the neat things about Christianity is that it's about a story, rather than a tribe. And there are enough gaps in the story that anyone can insert themselves in. A lot of Christianity's spread has been about empire and conquest, but some has been that we don't know what Jesus looked like, so we can imagine him looking a bit like us.
Mr. Dickson, that does rather neglect the fact that they wanted to be half-in, half-out, having the kudos of royalty and the personal income/additional freedom of celebrity.
They wanted fewer responsibilities and more perks and were, unsurprisingly, refused.
Failure of negotiation. Instead of both parties partially winning, both lost.
The immovability of the monarchy is seen as a strength. It isn’t.
Let’s wait until Harry has lost all his hair and Meghan’s looks begin to fade. Looking at his hair and her age, it won’t be long
They are popular because they are seen by many as this imperilled young couple. Telegenic and likeable. When they transition to an insanely privileged middle aged couple, living an extremely comfortable life in sunny California - and still somehow whining about it - I predict their popularity will dwindle quite quickly
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
In which case lots will clear off and become telephone sanitisers in accordance with Conservative philosophy of the free market.
That's the penny that still hasn't dropped yet. The strikes are just accelerating the inevitable unless pay rises to meet market expectations or labour supply is increased by other means.
There is no magic nurse tree.
If you get rid of the university degree requirement there probably is, there's no practical benefit of nurses going to university.
Although presumably that is a longer term solution: nurses without University degrees will still need training, and presumably they previously got some of that training on university nursing courses.
I work in one of the big UK university departments training nurses and midwives (although I'm little involved myself - occasional lecture - and not employed for that at all). The course is very hands-on, mostly practical training, including placements and the vast majority taught by qualified clinicians rather than traditional academics.
There's a bit on research methods, critical appraisal etc (the bit I sometimes contribute to) which I do think has some value. Obviously more important for doctors, but nurses sometimes end up in charge of care decisions, particularly those in primary care - helps to prevent them being taken in by and pushing evidence-free bollocks such as homeopathy. We also teach midwives and there's definitely a need there for an understanding of what has evidence and what does not!
But, whatever views on the above paragraph, a non-university training course would look very similar to what we deliver.
Which is the point of the nurse practitioner qualification still having the university degree bar. The point is that we've created an artificial limitation on who can qualify in certain professions and then there's a huge shortage of labour in them. Nursing is one of those professions where a university degree is mostly unnecessary and for those who want to go on to be nurse practitioners the degree would still be available anyway.
It's sort of like how tech industry jobs used to require a computer science degree but companies realised this was unnecessary and all they really wanted were people who could code, so anyone with 6 months in a bootcamp was able to a junior programmer job and work their way up. I have no formal qualifications for what I do, my chemistry degree has been worse than useless since I graduated, I'm just lucky it only resulted in £14k worth of debt rather than £45k as students are lumbered with now.
You do also get some people entering nursing who are only doing so because it's now seen as potentially a higher status/skill job with the degree (which will be useful to open other doors* even if turning away from nursing) and the enhanced roles etc.
Can you not still enter nursing without a degree? I thought there were still routes?
*that it's needed/perceived to be needed to open other doors is of course part of a problem that we both agree on
There are degree apprenticeships and nursing associate + shortened degree pathways.
And to any teenagers watching, remember that Student Loans are designed not to be loans really. They are meant to function as a graduate tax without being labelled as a tax. Most people will never get near paying them off, the interest rate isn't real interest and the write-offs are a design feature, not a bug.
Ignorant people making scary claims to further political points are much more of a problem.
If non degree and degree apprenticeship paths are available only a fool (or someone without decent advice) would take the paid degree option.
Sadly multiple cuts to careers advisory services over the past 40 years has made decent advice something that is impossible for most 18 year olds to access. So they head to uni and 30 years of 10% or so extra tax because they don’t know what other options are available.
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
You know that 19% is a bargaining mechanism starting point. Everyone does.
The Government would be better off accomodating the NHS workers and if union destruction is their manifesto, crush the rail workers.
I note all the PB Conservatives are falling into their 1980s Thatcherite line over this issue. Remember though, Thatcher picked and chose her battles.
Modern Tories often misunderstand what Margaret Thatcher was really like. She loved to come across as gung-ho, but in reality she was a careful and cunning strategist. She picked her fights extremely carefully. She would never have gone head to head with nurses FFS.
Interesting as well that she was opposed to two of the most contentious post-Thatcher privatisations - that of the Royal Mail and the Railways.
She was also opposed, quite rightly, to the establishment of the National Lottery. She fought it for years, against a skilled internal campaign within her own party. She quite rightly saw that it was a cynical tool for removing vast sums of cash from poor and stupid people in order to suppress the tax bills of people that could easily afford to fund public services.
The original purpose of the Lottery money was to fund things that were traditionally outside government spending - the classic was the “save this work of art for the nation”, a case of which caused John Major to put his support behind it, IIRC.
There have been a number of attempts to divert more money from it to “schools and hospitals spending”, since. Mostly beaten iff. The government still takes the vast majority of the ticket price in tax, though.
The other point is that due to globalisation, other countries lotteries were beginning to make their mark in the U.K. - the huge Spanish lottery, for example. One argument for the U.K. lottery was that it would dominate the U.K. market, keeping the money and regulation in the U.K.
From total ticket sales of £8,090.7 million in the year ending 31 March 2022:
£1,911.8 million was raised for National Lottery projects £4,612.3 million was paid to players in prizes £970.9 million went to the Government in Lottery Duty £265.4 million was earned by retailers in commission
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
I actually saw a bit of the Netflix doco last night (Mrs Anabob is well into the royals, loves the soap opera, fashion and the goss).
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
No it was a whingefest from their $10 million mansion in sunny California paid for by Netflix millions directed at Americans while Brits face the cold and rising cost of living. Meghan really doesn't care that much about us or the Commonwealth. She cares about becoming A list in the US, witness her squeal of delight when Beyonce tweeted her.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Out of interest have you been watching it? I haven't and I don't know anyone who has. Is it popular?
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
Can you point to any historical text which says that?
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
No, no and << checks notes >> no
The last no, actually why not? Why not take a note of that thought? Anyone saying what you said about Jesus in Cornwall being untrue can’t know that for certain. We get a lot of our history from documents written by Christians. Certainly after the the council of Nicaea and the arrival of Popes, they took a dim view of the what they saw as heresy that went on before that. A Christian monk on UK during Dark Ages who wrote down aural traditions like Jesus in Cornwall might have had his parchment ripped up and himself put on the naughty step. 1200 years later there are still aural histories for Blake to hear, which is interesting I suppose as it was not just in Cornwall but in the med too the same aural stories.
Sects. I think go goes back to what I said about sects. What Joseph of Aramathea gets up to might be a bone of contention to rival sect leaders and their followers.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
And yet again you are moved to defend your fellow Nat, come what may, and without a blink of shame
Perhaps because you share Stuart Dickson’s anti-English racism? But you are more domesticated, so you don’t let it show. He is feral. Gone to savagery in the wilds of Skane
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
Might be a statement of the flipping obvious, but didn’t he spent his childhood and youth learning the trade of carpentry? Not sure they handed out degrees for such a piffling vocational job, but I imagine it consumed most of his waking hours nevertheless.
A theologian friend of mine suggests that Jesus's role as a carpenter was emphasised to show his role on the very bottom rung of Judean society. The way the Judean economy worked was subsistence agriculture, and only those without the means to support themselves through what they could raise had to then branch out into selling their labour elsewhere. A carpenter in today's society is quite a skilled trade, but we shouldn't assume that that was true of Jesus: he may well in practice have just been hoying lumps of wood about. It's quite likely that he was better described in today's terms as 'jobbing unskilled labourer'. I don't know how true that is. But that comes from a man who is professionally religious and has a degree in theology. His other theory - which he trots out every year - is that being born in a stable is actually quite luxurious, or at least par for the course, in ancient Palestine. Houses would have two rooms: one for the humans who lived there and one for the animals and/or guests. Basically the Holy Family were expected In Line With The Prophecy: someone had made up the spare room for them. Again, I am merely reporting someone else's theory. File under 'bloke on the internet said'.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
Is this the same guy who said the muslims in India have got it coming to them because of what a (muslim) invader allegedly did 800 years ago, while quoting extensively from Hindutva propaganda?
Imagine if a poster said the christians in Syria deserve to be treated badly by islamic state because of what crusaders did hundreds of years ago.
Some kinds of bigotry are more acceptable than others.
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
In which case lots will clear off and become telephone sanitisers in accordance with Conservative philosophy of the free market.
That's the penny that still hasn't dropped yet. The strikes are just accelerating the inevitable unless pay rises to meet market expectations or labour supply is increased by other means.
There is no magic nurse tree.
If you get rid of the university degree requirement there probably is, there's no practical benefit of nurses going to university.
Although presumably that is a longer term solution: nurses without University degrees will still need training, and presumably they previously got some of that training on university nursing courses.
I work in one of the big UK university departments training nurses and midwives (although I'm little involved myself - occasional lecture - and not employed for that at all). The course is very hands-on, mostly practical training, including placements and the vast majority taught by qualified clinicians rather than traditional academics.
There's a bit on research methods, critical appraisal etc (the bit I sometimes contribute to) which I do think has some value. Obviously more important for doctors, but nurses sometimes end up in charge of care decisions, particularly those in primary care - helps to prevent them being taken in by and pushing evidence-free bollocks such as homeopathy. We also teach midwives and there's definitely a need there for an understanding of what has evidence and what does not!
But, whatever views on the above paragraph, a non-university training course would look very similar to what we deliver.
Which is the point of the nurse practitioner qualification still having the university degree bar. The point is that we've created an artificial limitation on who can qualify in certain professions and then there's a huge shortage of labour in them. Nursing is one of those professions where a university degree is mostly unnecessary and for those who want to go on to be nurse practitioners the degree would still be available anyway.
It's sort of like how tech industry jobs used to require a computer science degree but companies realised this was unnecessary and all they really wanted were people who could code, so anyone with 6 months in a bootcamp was able to a junior programmer job and work their way up. I have no formal qualifications for what I do, my chemistry degree has been worse than useless since I graduated, I'm just lucky it only resulted in £14k worth of debt rather than £45k as students are lumbered with now.
You do also get some people entering nursing who are only doing so because it's now seen as potentially a higher status/skill job with the degree (which will be useful to open other doors* even if turning away from nursing) and the enhanced roles etc.
Can you not still enter nursing without a degree? I thought there were still routes?
*that it's needed/perceived to be needed to open other doors is of course part of a problem that we both agree on
There are degree apprenticeships and nursing associate + shortened degree pathways.
And to any teenagers watching, remember that Student Loans are designed not to be loans really. They are meant to function as a graduate tax without being labelled as a tax. Most people will never get near paying them off, the interest rate isn't real interest and the write-offs are a design feature, not a bug.
Ignorant people making scary claims to further political points are much more of a problem.
If non degree and degree apprenticeship paths are available only a fool (or someone without decent advice) would take the paid degree option.
Sadly multiple cuts to careers advisory services over the past 40 years has made decent advice something that is impossible for most 18 year olds to access. So they head to uni and 30 years of 10% or so extra tax because they don’t know what other options are available.
Degree apprenticeships are certainly attractive but do have some drawbacks. They take longer (I think), have intense periods of study at a Uni, and are not well paid during the apprenticeship duration. A nursing degree gives the advantage of being quicker, you get a student experience (not everyone will think that important) and the loans are indeed a graduate tax but with a limit on what you pay, and at what salary you start to pay it back.
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
I actually saw a bit of the Netflix doco last night (Mrs Anabob is well into the royals, loves the soap opera, fashion and the goss).
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
No it was a whingefest from their $10 million mansion in sunny California paid for by Netflix millions directed at Americans while Brits face the cold and rising cost of living. Meghan really doesn't care that much about us or the Commonwealth. She cares about becoming A list in the US, witness her squeal of delight when Beyonce tweeted her.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Out of interest have you been watching it? I haven't and I don't know anyone who has. Is it popular?
We have watched all of it bar the last episode, it was clearly scripted and orchestrated by Meghan, Harry is just her puppet she used for social advancement.
In a few years once he is no longer useful she probably dumps him for a tech billionaire rather than end up a latter day Wallis Simpson
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
Can you point to any historical text which says that?
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
No, no and << checks notes >> no
The last no, actually why not? Why not take a note of that thought? Anyone saying what you said about Jesus in Cornwall being untrue can’t know that for certain. We get a lot of our history from documents written by Christians. Certainly after the the council of Nicaea and the arrival of Popes, they took a dim view of the what they saw as heresy that went on before that. A Christian monk on UK during Dark Ages who wrote down aural traditions like Jesus in Cornwall might have had his parchment ripped up and himself put on the naughty step. 1200 years later there are still aural histories for Blake to hear, which is interesting I suppose as it was not just in Cornwall but in the med too the same aural stories.
Sects. I think go goes back to what I said about sects. What Joseph of Aramathea gets up to might be a bone of contention to rival sect leaders and their followers.
I was being flippant. I’m still a bit sickly so unable to take on a vast theological debate. Sorry!
But in brief I agree with you. WHO KNOWS. I don’t 100% dismiss the Jesus in Cornwall mythos. 99% sure. But not 100%
I’ve spent much of my Knapper’s Gazette life writing about Gobekli Tepe, and watching the skeptics get confounded time and again. So I know that sometimes the most unlikely ideas or discoveries CAN be true
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
"Yeabutwhaddabout..."
Since the person in question is participating in this particular whiny collective prolapse I don't think it really counts as whataboutery. As I may have mentioned I enjoy collecting hypocrisies, racists whining about racism is an oldie but a goody.
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
Can you point to any historical text which says that?
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
No, no and << checks notes >> no
The last no, actually why not? Why not take a note of that thought? Anyone saying what you said about Jesus in Cornwall being untrue can’t know that for certain. We get a lot of our history from documents written by Christians. Certainly after the the council of Nicaea and the arrival of Popes, they took a dim view of the what they saw as heresy that went on before that. A Christian monk on UK during Dark Ages who wrote down aural traditions like Jesus in Cornwall might have had his parchment ripped up and himself put on the naughty step. 1200 years later there are still aural histories for Blake to hear, which is interesting I suppose as it was not just in Cornwall but in the med too the same aural stories.
Sects. I think go goes back to what I said about sects. What Joseph of Aramathea gets up to might be a bone of contention to rival sect leaders and their followers.
I was being flippant. I’m still a bit sickly so unable to take on a vast theological debate. Sorry!
But in brief I agree with you. WHO KNOWS. I don’t 100% dismiss the Jesus in Cornwall mythos. 99% sure. But not 100%
I’ve spent much of my Knapper’s Gazette life writing about Gobekli Tepe, and watching the skeptics get confounded time and again. So I know that sometimes the most unlikely ideas or discoveries CAN be true
I think its quite likely that some people moved round the world for trade, and adventure, a lot more than is commonly supposed. Its certainly possible for someone from Judea to have visited the British Isles. After all, lots of Romans did.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
"Yeabutwhaddabout..."
Since the person in question is participating in this particular whiny collective prolapse I don't think it really counts as whataboutery. As I may have mentioned I enjoy collecting hypocrisies, racists whining about racism is an oldie but a goody.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
And yet again you are moved to defend your fellow Nat, come what may, and without a blink of shame
Perhaps because you share Stuart Dickson’s anti-English racism? But you are more domesticated, so you don’t let it show. He is feral. Gone to savagery in the wilds of Skane
On this occasion seems more like TUD is attacking you, rather than actually defending SD, who is obviously another idiot.
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
Might be a statement of the flipping obvious, but didn’t he spent his childhood and youth learning the trade of carpentry? Not sure they handed out degrees for such a piffling vocational job, but I imagine it consumed most of his waking hours nevertheless.
A theologian friend of mine suggests that Jesus's role as a carpenter was emphasised to show his role on the very bottom rung of Judean society. The way the Judean economy worked was subsistence agriculture, and only those without the means to support themselves through what they could raise had to then branch out into selling their labour elsewhere. A carpenter in today's society is quite a skilled trade, but we shouldn't assume that that was true of Jesus: he may well in practice have just been hoying lumps of wood about. It's quite likely that he was better described in today's terms as 'jobbing unskilled labourer'. I don't know how true that is. But that comes from a man who is professionally religious and has a degree in theology. His other theory - which he trots out every year - is that being born in a stable is actually quite luxurious, or at least par for the course, in ancient Palestine. Houses would have two rooms: one for the humans who lived there and one for the animals and/or guests. Basically the Holy Family were expected In Line With The Prophecy: someone had made up the spare room for them. Again, I am merely reporting someone else's theory. File under 'bloke on the internet said'.
The point again is, no one knows for certain whether birth story is later invented to make him look a “man of the people” not someone born into Royalty and high level sectarian politics. I have also heard it said miraculous births were actually common, where people took care of pregnant ladies and brought children up as they own, the miracle element was not knowing who the father actually was, because maybe her father would kill them. All that is not important to having a Christian faith and belief though in my opinion - you can be a historian and a Christian, a scientist and a Christian. The important point is those who take history as proof, don’t think for a moment ancient historical texts, exciting as they are, can be misleading bias.
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started.
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
Most of the Commonwealth now have their own heads of state anyway, the Commonwealth Secretary General is already a black woman and William has said he may not even head the Commonwealth so it alternates amongst Commonwealth heads of state
"Kate is more popular than Meghan".
When the tabloid media narrative (especially the world dominating Daily Mail) is one of; if Kate Middleton wears a white dress or eats an avocado it is wholesome loveliness, yet when Meghan Markle wears a white dress or eats an avocado its full on Soviet-era expansionist Communism, that's hardly surprising.
I bet Meghan Markle even had former Labour Prime Ministers to her communist wedding!
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
I actually saw a bit of the Netflix doco last night (Mrs Anabob is well into the royals, loves the soap opera, fashion and the goss).
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
No it was a whingefest from their $10 million mansion in sunny California paid for by Netflix millions directed at Americans while Brits face the cold and rising cost of living. Meghan really doesn't care that much about us or the Commonwealth. She cares about becoming A list in the US, witness her squeal of delight when Beyonce tweeted her.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Out of interest have you been watching it? I haven't and I don't know anyone who has. Is it popular?
We have watched all of it bar the last episode, it was clearly scripted and orchestrated by Meghan, Harry is just her puppet she used for social advancement.
In a few years once he is no longer useful she probably dumps him for a tech billionaire rather than end up a latter day Wallis Simpson
You're a bit like the Daily Mail online on this. Every day they have an article saying "Why We Should Ignore Meghan and Harry!". This is followed by another 30 articles about, er, Harry and Meghan.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
And yet again you are moved to defend your fellow Nat, come what may, and without a blink of shame
Perhaps because you share Stuart Dickson’s anti-English racism? But you are more domesticated, so you don’t let it show. He is feral. Gone to savagery in the wilds of Skane
On this occasion seems more like TUD is attacking you, rather than actually defending SD, who is obviously another idiot.
Well, I’ve just asked TUD if @StuartDickson is actually a racist. He seems close to admitting it, finally. The big question of the morning. Is @StuartDickson a racist
Let’s see what @Theuniondivvie says. Whether he can - belatedly - admit it
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
In which case lots will clear off and become telephone sanitisers in accordance with Conservative philosophy of the free market.
That's the penny that still hasn't dropped yet. The strikes are just accelerating the inevitable unless pay rises to meet market expectations or labour supply is increased by other means.
There is no magic nurse tree.
If you get rid of the university degree requirement there probably is, there's no practical benefit of nurses going to university.
Although presumably that is a longer term solution: nurses without University degrees will still need training, and presumably they previously got some of that training on university nursing courses.
I work in one of the big UK university departments training nurses and midwives (although I'm little involved myself - occasional lecture - and not employed for that at all). The course is very hands-on, mostly practical training, including placements and the vast majority taught by qualified clinicians rather than traditional academics.
There's a bit on research methods, critical appraisal etc (the bit I sometimes contribute to) which I do think has some value. Obviously more important for doctors, but nurses sometimes end up in charge of care decisions, particularly those in primary care - helps to prevent them being taken in by and pushing evidence-free bollocks such as homeopathy. We also teach midwives and there's definitely a need there for an understanding of what has evidence and what does not!
But, whatever views on the above paragraph, a non-university training course would look very similar to what we deliver.
Which is the point of the nurse practitioner qualification still having the university degree bar. The point is that we've created an artificial limitation on who can qualify in certain professions and then there's a huge shortage of labour in them. Nursing is one of those professions where a university degree is mostly unnecessary and for those who want to go on to be nurse practitioners the degree would still be available anyway.
It's sort of like how tech industry jobs used to require a computer science degree but companies realised this was unnecessary and all they really wanted were people who could code, so anyone with 6 months in a bootcamp was able to a junior programmer job and work their way up. I have no formal qualifications for what I do, my chemistry degree has been worse than useless since I graduated, I'm just lucky it only resulted in £14k worth of debt rather than £45k as students are lumbered with now.
You do also get some people entering nursing who are only doing so because it's now seen as potentially a higher status/skill job with the degree (which will be useful to open other doors* even if turning away from nursing) and the enhanced roles etc.
Can you not still enter nursing without a degree? I thought there were still routes?
*that it's needed/perceived to be needed to open other doors is of course part of a problem that we both agree on
There are degree apprenticeships and nursing associate + shortened degree pathways.
And to any teenagers watching, remember that Student Loans are designed not to be loans really. They are meant to function as a graduate tax without being labelled as a tax. Most people will never get near paying them off, the interest rate isn't real interest and the write-offs are a design feature, not a bug.
Ignorant people making scary claims to further political points are much more of a problem.
If non degree and degree apprenticeship paths are available only a fool (or someone without decent advice) would take the paid degree option.
Sadly multiple cuts to careers advisory services over the past 40 years has made decent advice something that is impossible for most 18 year olds to access. So they head to uni and 30 years of 10% or so extra tax because they don’t know what other options are available.
True, though even that's a bit of an oversimplification. The threshold for the tax that isn't a tax is pretty high- about 25k. So a newly qualified nurse on 27k is paying about £200 a year, an average nurse on 35k is paying £1000 a year and a nurse near the top of their payscale on about 40k pays about £1500 a year.
One of the neatest cons Sunak has pulled is to make us think about the marginal tax rates rather than the amount we are paying that tax on.
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
You know that 19% is a bargaining mechanism starting point. Everyone does.
The Government would be better off accomodating the NHS workers and if union destruction is their manifesto, crush the rail workers.
I note all the PB Conservatives are falling into their 1980s Thatcherite line over this issue. Remember though, Thatcher picked and chose her battles.
Modern Tories often misunderstand what Margaret Thatcher was really like. She loved to come across as gung-ho, but in reality she was a careful and cunning strategist. She picked her fights extremely carefully. She would never have gone head to head with nurses FFS.
Interesting as well that she was opposed to two of the most contentious post-Thatcher privatisations - that of the Royal Mail and the Railways.
She was also opposed, quite rightly, to the establishment of the National Lottery. She fought it for years, against a skilled internal campaign within her own party. She quite rightly saw that it was a cynical tool for removing vast sums of cash from poor and stupid people in order to suppress the tax bills of people that could easily afford to fund public services.
The original purpose of the Lottery money was to fund things that were traditionally outside government spending - the classic was the “save this work of art for the nation”, a case of which caused John Major to put his support behind it, IIRC.
There have been a number of attempts to divert more money from it to “schools and hospitals spending”, since. Mostly beaten iff. The government still takes the vast majority of the ticket price in tax, though.
The other point is that due to globalisation, other countries lotteries were beginning to make their mark in the U.K. - the huge Spanish lottery, for example. One argument for the U.K. lottery was that it would dominate the U.K. market, keeping the money and regulation in the U.K.
From total ticket sales of £8,090.7 million in the year ending 31 March 2022:
£1,911.8 million was raised for National Lottery projects £4,612.3 million was paid to players in prizes £970.9 million went to the Government in Lottery Duty £265.4 million was earned by retailers in commission
And the philanthropic owner of the lottery (a Canadian pension fund iirc) makes no profit whatsoever?
I meant the vast majority of the money after prizes - the owners of the lottery are right at the back of the queue for money. First is the tax, then the lottery good causes (which the government controls). Than the retailers.
The actual profit the owners take is a fraction of a percent of the ticket price IIRC.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
And yet again you are moved to defend your fellow Nat, come what may, and without a blink of shame
Perhaps because you share Stuart Dickson’s anti-English racism? But you are more domesticated, so you don’t let it show. He is feral. Gone to savagery in the wilds of Skane
On this occasion seems more like TUD is attacking you, rather than actually defending SD, who is obviously another idiot.
Well, I’ve just asked TUD if @StuartDickson is actually a racist. He seems close to admitting it, finally. The big question of the morning. Is @StuartDickson a racist
Let’s see what @Theuniondivvie says. Whether he can - belatedly - admit it
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
I actually saw a bit of the Netflix doco last night (Mrs Anabob is well into the royals, loves the soap opera, fashion and the goss).
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
No it was a whingefest from their $10 million mansion in sunny California paid for by Netflix millions directed at Americans while Brits face the cold and rising cost of living. Meghan really doesn't care that much about us or the Commonwealth. She cares about becoming A list in the US, witness her squeal of delight when Beyonce tweeted her.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Out of interest have you been watching it? I haven't and I don't know anyone who has. Is it popular?
We have watched all of it bar the last episode, it was clearly scripted and orchestrated by Meghan, Harry is just her puppet she used for social advancement.
In a few years once he is no longer useful she probably dumps him for a tech billionaire rather than end up a latter day Wallis Simpson
You're a bit like the Daily Mail online on this. Every day they have an article saying "Why We Should Ignore Meghan and Harry!". This is followed by another 30 articles about, er, Harry and Meghan.
But the comparison is strikingly apt. Edward and Mrs Simpson were massive news in the English speaking world for years - as Harry and Meghan are now. But then the world moved on - war! - and their glamour faded fast. And their salience fell away
Mr. Dickson, that does rather neglect the fact that they wanted to be half-in, half-out, having the kudos of royalty and the personal income/additional freedom of celebrity.
They wanted fewer responsibilities and more perks and were, unsurprisingly, refused.
Most sane human beings would want all-out of the cruel royalist goldfish bowl, where your family and personal life is under permanent scrutiny.
They wanted a compromise. The family could have negotiated rather than being pig headed about it. Cutting their noses off to spite their faces.
Nothing says "I don't want my life under permanent scrutiny" like publicly picking a fight with some of the most famous people on Earth, and then making a Netflix docuseries to tell your side of the story. Especially when the other side refuses point blank to say anything in public on the matter.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
"Yeabutwhaddabout..."
Since the person in question is participating in this particular whiny collective prolapse I don't think it really counts as whataboutery. As I may have mentioned I enjoy collecting hypocrisies, racists whining about racism is an oldie but a goody.
There are several PB posters broadly on the left of centre, "woke remainer" side of politics who find the Anglophobia (mostly dogwhistle but occasionally blatant) very insidious. Collective stereotyping of a group of people based on their geographical location is a bad thing full stop.
It is counterproductive. I have some sympathy for the independence cause and if I were living North of the border I would probably be a swing voter on the issue. But then I see this stuff and wonder if this is just Brexit-style identity politics. Blaming the English ("Westminster") rather than Johnny foreigner ("Brussels").
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
I actually saw a bit of the Netflix doco last night (Mrs Anabob is well into the royals, loves the soap opera, fashion and the goss).
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
No it was a whingefest from their $10 million mansion in sunny California paid for by Netflix millions directed at Americans while Brits face the cold and rising cost of living. Meghan really doesn't care that much about us or the Commonwealth. She cares about becoming A list in the US, witness her squeal of delight when Beyonce tweeted her.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Out of interest have you been watching it? I haven't and I don't know anyone who has. Is it popular?
We have watched all of it bar the last episode, it was clearly scripted and orchestrated by Meghan, Harry is just her puppet she used for social advancement.
In a few years once he is no longer useful she probably dumps him for a tech billionaire rather than end up a latter day Wallis Simpson
You're a bit like the Daily Mail online on this. Every day they have an article saying "Why We Should Ignore Meghan and Harry!". This is followed by another 30 articles about, er, Harry and Meghan.
But the comparison is strikingly apt. Edward and Mrs Simpson were massive news in the English speaking world for years - as Harry and Meghan are now. But then the world moved on - war! - and their glamour faded fast. And their salience fell away
The same will happen to H&M
Indeed, the Princess of Wales is also the strongest royal now the Queen has passed and will deal with the Duchess of Sussex as the Queen Mother dealt with the Duchess of Windsor, ignore her but ensure they both fade into obscurity in exile abroad while the royal family focuses in on her husband and children as William prepares to take the throne
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
And yet again you are moved to defend your fellow Nat, come what may, and without a blink of shame
Perhaps because you share Stuart Dickson’s anti-English racism? But you are more domesticated, so you don’t let it show. He is feral. Gone to savagery in the wilds of Skane
On this occasion seems more like TUD is attacking you, rather than actually defending SD, who is obviously another idiot.
Well, I’ve just asked TUD if @StuartDickson is actually a racist. He seems close to admitting it, finally. The big question of the morning. Is @StuartDickson a racist
Let’s see what @Theuniondivvie says. Whether he can - belatedly - admit it
I suspect he isn't. I suspect you are.
Clear enough?
You just can’t do it, can you? It’s like there’s some short circuit in your wizened Nat brain. “A fellow Nat - defend defend defend”. The hive mind at work
If @StuartDickson came out and said “och, let’s kill all the English firstborn” you’d first ignore it, then you’d say “what about HYUFD’s tanks” then you’d slink off the site for a few hours, leaving a trail of tartan slime, hoping that when you returned the argument might have moved on
Question for Christians on here (@hyufd) re something that just popped into my brain yesterday. Having not read further than Genesis of the bible can someone tell me is there much (anything) in the bible about Jesus between being born and being an adult?
In Luke's Gospel, Joseph and Mary take the fam to the Temple when Jesus was twelve. He somehow gets left behind there for a couple of days, ending up in deep conversation with the Temple elders. He's then a bit sassy to his worried mum.
I am a Christian on here like HY, and I can build a bit on what you have said Stu and give an honest answer to kjh.
The honest answer kjh is no - there’s not much in Bible or out of it on Jesus life before his ministry started. As well as having Faith and big supporter of CoE but also attend services outside CoE, I am also a big fan of history - but there is nothing I’ve seen that sheds light on Jesus youth before his ministry, and not much historical Jesus outside of the Bible even of his ministry. The first bit of Bible written is Paul’s letters from Greek Islands where he is helping non Jews realise how important Jesus is to everyone, and this was more than a decade after Jesus had been crucified by the Jewish leaders and Roman Empire.
But to build on what you said Stu - Uncle Joseph is big in Jesus life especially all what he does after the crucifixion, and Uncle Joseph was a big political figure on council, and who he represented likely sheds light onto which sect Jesus belonged too.
Sects. That’s got your attention. It’s important to remember there’s sectarian disagreements Jesus is a part of. Hence the incidence you mentioned, and much later Jewish leaders wanting him executed by Romans.
Also I read something that through his mothers side Jesus was close to Royalty.
If you are interested in more I can recommend AN Wilson biography of Jesus.
Thanks for the replies everyone. Don't know why it took me 68 years to think of that question.
There is no “mystery” about Jesus Christ’s early life. He was learning the tin trade with his merchant uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, hence the Son of God’s trips to Cornwall, as limned in William Blake’s Jerusalem. Next
Can you point to any historical text which says that?
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
No, no and << checks notes >> no
The last no, actually why not? Why not take a note of that thought? Anyone saying what you said about Jesus in Cornwall being untrue can’t know that for certain. We get a lot of our history from documents written by Christians. Certainly after the the council of Nicaea and the arrival of Popes, they took a dim view of the what they saw as heresy that went on before that. A Christian monk on UK during Dark Ages who wrote down aural traditions like Jesus in Cornwall might have had his parchment ripped up and himself put on the naughty step. 1200 years later there are still aural histories for Blake to hear, which is interesting I suppose as it was not just in Cornwall but in the med too the same aural stories.
Sects. I think go goes back to what I said about sects. What Joseph of Aramathea gets up to might be a bone of contention to rival sect leaders and their followers.
I was being flippant. I’m still a bit sickly so unable to take on a vast theological debate. Sorry!
But in brief I agree with you. WHO KNOWS. I don’t 100% dismiss the Jesus in Cornwall mythos. 99% sure. But not 100%
I’ve spent much of my Knapper’s Gazette life writing about Gobekli Tepe, and watching the skeptics get confounded time and again. So I know that sometimes the most unlikely ideas or discoveries CAN be true
I think its quite likely that some people moved round the world for trade, and adventure, a lot more than is commonly supposed. Its certainly possible for someone from Judea to have visited the British Isles. After all, lots of Romans did.
Maybe not enough evidence of Jesus, but I think enough evidence to convince me Joseph of Aramathea had a tie in with Glastonbury and died there. If he was a minority sect leader and there was violence at home he was probably safer here.
I also know a bit about History of Elizabeth the first, and how it ties in here is how the politicians in her fathers and own court actually used history, with a few modifications, for important tie in with historical figures.
The Holy Roman Empire too also felt it important to tie in with both Julius Caesar and Saint Peter!
The question I am asking is, is it from these politicians in courts doing that we get our history we are taught in schools today?
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
In which case lots will clear off and become telephone sanitisers in accordance with Conservative philosophy of the free market.
That's the penny that still hasn't dropped yet. The strikes are just accelerating the inevitable unless pay rises to meet market expectations or labour supply is increased by other means.
There is no magic nurse tree.
If you get rid of the university degree requirement there probably is, there's no practical benefit of nurses going to university.
Although presumably that is a longer term solution: nurses without University degrees will still need training, and presumably they previously got some of that training on university nursing courses.
I work in one of the big UK university departments training nurses and midwives (although I'm little involved myself - occasional lecture - and not employed for that at all). The course is very hands-on, mostly practical training, including placements and the vast majority taught by qualified clinicians rather than traditional academics.
There's a bit on research methods, critical appraisal etc (the bit I sometimes contribute to) which I do think has some value. Obviously more important for doctors, but nurses sometimes end up in charge of care decisions, particularly those in primary care - helps to prevent them being taken in by and pushing evidence-free bollocks such as homeopathy. We also teach midwives and there's definitely a need there for an understanding of what has evidence and what does not!
But, whatever views on the above paragraph, a non-university training course would look very similar to what we deliver.
I suspect with the technology involved the role of a nurse is a more sophisticated job than even that of a doctor say thirty, forty or fifty years ago.
I never want my future days on an ICU ward managed by a YTS trainee.
A 6% nurses payrise in line with the national average may be coming but not the 19% they want
You know that 19% is a bargaining mechanism starting point. Everyone does.
The Government would be better off accomodating the NHS workers and if union destruction is their manifesto, crush the rail workers.
I note all the PB Conservatives are falling into their 1980s Thatcherite line over this issue. Remember though, Thatcher picked and chose her battles.
Modern Tories often misunderstand what Margaret Thatcher was really like. She loved to come across as gung-ho, but in reality she was a careful and cunning strategist. She picked her fights extremely carefully. She would never have gone head to head with nurses FFS.
Interesting as well that she was opposed to two of the most contentious post-Thatcher privatisations - that of the Royal Mail and the Railways.
She was also opposed, quite rightly, to the establishment of the National Lottery. She fought it for years, against a skilled internal campaign within her own party. She quite rightly saw that it was a cynical tool for removing vast sums of cash from poor and stupid people in order to suppress the tax bills of people that could easily afford to fund public services.
The original purpose of the Lottery money was to fund things that were traditionally outside government spending - the classic was the “save this work of art for the nation”, a case of which caused John Major to put his support behind it, IIRC.
There have been a number of attempts to divert more money from it to “schools and hospitals spending”, since. Mostly beaten iff. The government still takes the vast majority of the ticket price in tax, though.
The other point is that due to globalisation, other countries lotteries were beginning to make their mark in the U.K. - the huge Spanish lottery, for example. One argument for the U.K. lottery was that it would dominate the U.K. market, keeping the money and regulation in the U.K.
From total ticket sales of £8,090.7 million in the year ending 31 March 2022:
£1,911.8 million was raised for National Lottery projects £4,612.3 million was paid to players in prizes £970.9 million went to the Government in Lottery Duty £265.4 million was earned by retailers in commission
And the philanthropic owner of the lottery (a Canadian pension fund iirc) makes no profit whatsoever?
I meant the vast majority of the money after prizes - the owners of the lottery are right at the back of the queue for money. First is the tax, then the lottery good causes (which the government controls). Than the retailers.
The actual profit the owners take is a fraction of a percent of the ticket price IIRC.
Neat accounting trick, excluding the majority of where the ticket money goes from the calculation of where the ticket money goes to claim that a small minority is "the vast majority"!
It's not even that: excluding the prizes it's good causes 55%, tax 28%, retailers 7.5% and admin/profit 9.5%.
Your daily reminder that the man who waltzed off with the Parthenon marbles, on behalf of the British Empire, was Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine, born in Broomhall, Fife, Scotland
Don't let facts get in the way of racism,
@StuartDickson seems to be the only example of a pure, unabashed racist on PB. He fears, loathes and despises the English, simply because they are English, and it applies to all English people. He’s really not a great advert for Scottish Nationalism, yet his Nat friends all tolerate and encourage him, which is rather telling
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
Don't think he's ever unapologetically bigged up Nick Griffin, Tommy Robinson or Putin, or called for the internment of Muslims.
No one is saying he has. He has, however, openly stated his hatred of England and English people. Not all racists are the same.
Yep, but I'm saying someone has and all the HE DID A ANTI ENGLISH RAYZISM!!! types on PB don't give a fuck.
"Yeabutwhaddabout..."
Since the person in question is participating in this particular whiny collective prolapse I don't think it really counts as whataboutery. As I may have mentioned I enjoy collecting hypocrisies, racists whining about racism is an oldie but a goody.
There are several PB posters broadly on the left of centre, "woke remainer" side of politics who find the Anglophobia (mostly dogwhistle but occasionally blatant) very insidious. Collective stereotyping of a group of people based on their geographical location is a bad thing full stop.
It is counterproductive. I have some sympathy for the independence cause and if I were living North of the border I would probably be a swing voter on the issue. But then I see this stuff and wonder if this is just Brexit-style identity politics. Blaming the English ("Westminster") rather than Johnny foreigner ("Brussels").
Crocodile tears. You were gleefully defaming another pro-independence poster on the previous thread.
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
I actually saw a bit of the Netflix doco last night (Mrs Anabob is well into the royals, loves the soap opera, fashion and the goss).
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
No it was a whingefest from their $10 million mansion in sunny California paid for by Netflix millions directed at Americans while Brits face the cold and rising cost of living. Meghan really doesn't care that much about us or the Commonwealth. She cares about becoming A list in the US, witness her squeal of delight when Beyonce tweeted her.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Out of interest have you been watching it? I haven't and I don't know anyone who has. Is it popular?
We have watched all of it bar the last episode, it was clearly scripted and orchestrated by Meghan, Harry is just her puppet she used for social advancement.
In a few years once he is no longer useful she probably dumps him for a tech billionaire rather than end up a latter day Wallis Simpson
You're a bit like the Daily Mail online on this. Every day they have an article saying "Why We Should Ignore Meghan and Harry!". This is followed by another 30 articles about, er, Harry and Meghan.
But the comparison is strikingly apt. Edward and Mrs Simpson were massive news in the English speaking world for years - as Harry and Meghan are now. But then the world moved on - war! - and their glamour faded fast. And their salience fell away
OT SPotY nominations are out and even worse than last year.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
Why? They look reasonable to me. I don't see any tokenism this time.
Last year, lots of Olympians were omitted but at least there was the excuse there were a lot of them. Who has been left out this year? No Tyson Fury who has twice defended his world heavyweight belt. No Rory McIlroy who has won three tournaments and reached world number one. Two of the others have done nothing this year they've not done previously, so that can't be it. Half this year's nominees aren't even famous in their own households and if they were, maybe the BBC would have noticed one of them (Eve Muirhead) has retired.
Comments
Good deeds = British
Bad deeds = Scottish
At the start of this year the largest Independent Operator in the UK was planning more than a dozen wells for 2023/4. Now they will drill 2 - and those only because they are legally bound to do so. They have also decided, along with other companies, not to bother taking part in the 33rd licencing round which was announced with such fanfare by the Government back in October.
When the State is taking 75% of your profit in tax there is no incentive to continue to invest in the basin. Hence many of the companies are moving their E&A budgets to parts of the world which are more reasonable about taxation levels.
Just in case anyone was wondering: http://www.egyptologyscotland.co.uk/scots/
Nope, I thought not.
* Which is not that ridiculous by international standards
(Except the English Exchequer, but they don’t count.)
"Swatters used Ring cameras to livestream attacks, taunt police, prosecutors say.
More than a dozen attacks allegedly logged in a single week."
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/12/swatters-used-ring-cameras-to-livestream-attacks-taunt-police-prosecutors-say/
You get them in to your vast campus, then they spend money on the over priced accommodation you’ve partnered up with a big firm to build and own. Then they eat and drink at the bars on the vast campus.
You have to work hard to keep increasing the ratio of money that stay on your campus - but hey, nothing is for free.
The ones who went the GP route have relatively well paid, relaxing lives.
Those who went the hospital route did not. They worked (and often still work) long hours, needed to constantly move around the country to climb within their specialty, and had much lower incomes for much of their careers.
(The PSC is based on feudal Indonesian rice-growing arrangements. In poor years, the workers have enough to survive; in bumper years, they share some of the abundance, but the landowners get the bulk. Most adhere to it. Notoriously, not so much the Algerians. As I was told "A contract is just a pause in our negotiations....")
Oleg Deripaska’s criticism of the war in Ukraine was guarded – but enough for the Kremlin to ask him to stop.
Now, Russia is seizing a $1bn hotel complex and marina he built on the Black Sea on behalf of Putin’s favorite charity.
https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1605090890808119297
The strange thing is, if you can somehow force Mr Dickson onto other subjects, he’s often quite interesting. The summer habits of the Swedes. Uses for snowberries. Involuntary nudism
Yet, also a racist. And unapologetic
There is a difference though between fields Piano concertos from the classical Period and Lists from outside it, I can feel the difference but like both types.
Maybe the difference is who and what it is written for? Like the bit in Amadeus when his friends says you won’t make any money writing requiems you need to write what the public want to come out to hear. Liszt is writing to entertain bums on seats, in classical period composers are under employ, with the security and creature comforts of that, so that shapes their output instead. And then others like Bruckner composing for God, and Mahler for himself outside both his paid job and maybe not even bothered about the bums on seats and making money from it?
I think I mean you can hear the historical and money factor in the musical output.
The six nominees are gymnast Jessica Gadirova, footballer Beth Mead, curling's Eve Muirhead, cricketer Ben Stokes, snooker player Ronnie O'Sullivan and athlete Jake Wightman.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/63887059
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-34909845
https://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/andy-murray-scottish-british-myth-dispelled-1488766
Why are you so full of hate Stuart? Why do you hate other people so much?
It’s chilling to realize that racism is so powerful that the royal family would ruin what is for now the one opportunity they were given to reach the hearts and minds of the very people who make their lives possible. They had a gift: In Meghan Markle they had a woman who is intelligent, poised and largely able to live in the public eye, play the role of princess and give the best of herself in service of something bigger than herself.
… Harry and Meghan both say they would have worked on behalf of the monarchy for the rest of their lives if the royal family extended them a modicum of consideration and safety. They wanted the royal family to embrace Meghan’s role in Harry’s life and to use it — to use her — to the crown’s advantage. Instead, the family did the exact opposite time and time again.
The Sussexes were incredibly popular in Britain, in Australia, in South Africa and throughout the Commonwealth. Had they stayed in the monarchy, they may have become more and more of a threat.
($)
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/19/opinion/harry-meghan-monarchy.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
https://www.bbc.com/sport/sports-personality/63887059
Going to be boring SPOTY with little betting opportunity as will be Mead. Even though Stokes have been immense, he has won it before and all the push will be for Lioness winner.
What’s Going to Happen to All That Money Sam Bankman-Fried Gave Politicians?
The short answer is they may need to repay it.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/12/sam-bankman-fried-campaign-finance-violations-democrats-republicans-donations.html
…Bankman-Fried gave the maximum possible amount to new top House Democrat Hakeem Jeffries, as did his brother Gabe Bankman-Fried. Sam Bankman-Fried also maxed out to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Sean Patrick Maloney and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, and donated to her political action committee. He donated to Rep. Ritchie Torres, too. That’s just in New York. He also maxed out to incoming House Democratic Caucus chair Pete Aguilar of California, newly the third most powerful Dem in the House.
He gave, too, to the consequential campaign arm PACs on both the House and Senate side for Democrats, including $5,000 to Team Blue PAC, the political action committee founded by Jeffries. FEC filings show three donations to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, House Democrats’ most important campaign arm, totaling $250,000. He gave repeatedly to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the senate side equivalent, and $1 million to Senate Majority PAC, the adjoining super PAC. Bankman-Fried’s PAC Protect Our Future gave $6 million to Democrats’ House Majority PAC as well. (To be clear, Republicans also got in on the action here, with the National Republican Campaign Committee, Susan Collins, and other prominent GOPers also on the take from Bankman-Fried).
Did all of that money come from FTX customer accounts? Well, we don’t know yet, and that’s the problem. “It’s going to be a bear for prosecutors to figure that out,” said Fischer. “But what they’re saying is that a portion of the contributions were made using customer funds.”…
…Are Republicans in the clear? Absolutely not. FTX’s co-CEO Ryan Salame gave $25 million to Republicans, and the FTX’s top brass routed money to Senator Mitch McConnell and Representative Kevin McCarthy, as well as $3.5 million to the GOP’s Senate Leadership Fund super PAC. Bankman-Fried has claimed that he gave just as much in dark money to the GOP as he did in registered giving to Democrats. The details of that dark money still haven’t come to light. But it’s very likely Republicans will find themselves in a similar position. Sen. John Hoeven, a North Dakota Republican, has already announced that he gave $11,600—money received from Bankman-Fried and Salame—to the Salvation Army.
Back on the blue side of the aisle, critics have rightly said that the party courted this disaster by embracing the lavish spending of an overnight billionaire. Just a few weeks after election day, the decision to accept Bankman-Fried’s involvement in Democratic campaigns has become a political liability—fueling various conspiracy theories—as well as a financial one. At best, it was a massive tactical gaffe…
Yet they are both unpopular in Britain now and even in the US now Kate is more popular than Meghan.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/1019332-meghan-markle-beaten-by-kate-middleton-in-us-popularity-rating
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/12/09/after-prince-andrew-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle
Most of the Commonwealth now have their own heads of state anyway, the Commonwealth Secretary General is already a black woman and William has said he may not even head the Commonwealth so it alternates amongst Commonwealth heads of state
But unless Nicola Sturgeon is possessed of a nation-sized tardis, that observation is fatuous. If North Sea oil money had been invested in a Norwegian-style sovereign wealth fund, there'd be a big pile of cash for either the British or Scottish government but it wasn't so there isn't, and independence now will not magically create one.
I remember when they gave it to Nigel Mansell… great driver, but no one would accuse him of having a bubbling presence in the room….
Do you have any text that says Joseph of arimanthia is actually his uncle not his sect leader?
Are you looking to start a debate between value of aural history v written texts we must consider were naturally biased, not gospel, such as Norse texts started having Mediterranean Christian Martyrs put in after conversion?
Guilty.
Send him down to the twatfest.
They wanted fewer responsibilities and more perks and were, unsurprisingly, refused.
Outstanding entertainer.
"Personality" was always only the name of the award, not a criterion for judging it.
"People who lose a close family member could blame the government for a long time."
1. It's of zero importance for the next general election.
2. This has been set up. The RCN is not full of pétroleuses and versions of La Pasionaria.
3. Bashing the nurses brings home to other waged workers how tough the government is.
4. It's preparatory. Do any nurses have a problem with doing and thinking exactly as they're told, however crazy what they're supposed to believe actually is? Then step forward. Thanks. Now get out.
5. Arrangements for army involvement in the state health service will be further tested and established.
6. Note that many rail services were pulled even though the railworkers weren't actually on strike at the time. Bit of a giveaway there. Doubtless "experts" will say whatever happened was totally to be expected, as usual.
Prediction on the basis of the above analysis: there will be no last-minute or early "we've agreed to call off the strikes and go to arbitration instead, or otherwise seek a compromise". Nurse and other worker disobedience will be seen to be crushed.
It wasn’t what I was expecting at all! It was actually pretty good, interesting even.
Clearly it’s very much from Meg’s standpoint but nevertheless is far superior to most of the cap doffing royalist trash that pollutes the telly.
https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/nursing/how-become-nurse
There are degree apprenticeships and nursing associate + shortened degree pathways.
And to any teenagers watching, remember that Student Loans are designed not to be loans really. They are meant to function as a graduate tax without being labelled as a tax. Most people will never get near paying them off, the interest rate isn't real interest and the write-offs are a design feature, not a bug.
Ignorant people making scary claims to further political points are much more of a problem.
(Just trying to shed some light on the hate-filled nationalist mentality.)
The immovability of the monarchy is seen as a strength. It isn’t.
They wanted a compromise. The family could have negotiated rather than being pig headed
about it. Cutting their noses off to spite their faces.
I don't know how true that is. But that comes from a man who is professionally religious and has a degree in theology.
His other theory - which he trots out every year - is that being born in a stable is actually quite luxurious, or at least par for the course, in ancient Palestine. Houses would have two rooms: one for the humans who lived there and one for the animals and/or guests. Basically the Holy Family were expected In Line With The Prophecy: someone had made up the spare room for them.
Again, I am merely reporting someone else's theory. File under 'bloke on the internet said'.
The idea they would ever have moved to New Zealand or Canada over California or New York City (where Harry was filmed in a pal's apartment in Manhattan) is laughable
Remember this when they try to put one of their candidates in next time.
They are popular because they are seen by many as this imperilled young couple. Telegenic and likeable. When they transition to an insanely privileged middle aged couple, living an extremely comfortable life in sunny California - and still somehow whining about it - I predict their popularity will dwindle quite quickly
Sadly multiple cuts to careers advisory services over the past 40 years has made decent advice something that is impossible for most 18 year olds to access. So they head to uni and 30 years of 10% or so extra tax because they don’t know what other options are available.
Sects. I think go goes back to what I said about sects. What Joseph of Aramathea gets up to might be a bone of contention to rival sect leaders and their followers.
Perhaps because you share Stuart Dickson’s anti-English racism? But you are more domesticated, so you don’t let it show. He is feral. Gone to savagery in the wilds of Skane
Imagine if a poster said the christians in Syria deserve to be treated badly by islamic state because of what crusaders did hundreds of years ago.
Some kinds of bigotry are more acceptable than others.
A nursing degree gives the advantage of being quicker, you get a student experience (not everyone will think that important) and the loans are indeed a graduate tax but with a limit on what you pay, and at what salary you start to pay it back.
In a few years once he is no longer useful she probably dumps him for a tech billionaire rather than end up a latter day Wallis Simpson
But in brief I agree with you. WHO KNOWS. I don’t 100% dismiss the Jesus in Cornwall mythos. 99% sure. But not 100%
I’ve spent much of my Knapper’s Gazette life writing about Gobekli Tepe, and watching the skeptics get confounded time and again. So I know that sometimes the most unlikely ideas or discoveries CAN be true
As I may have mentioned I enjoy collecting hypocrisies, racists whining about racism is an oldie but a goody.
http://gnosis.org/library/inftoma.htm
When the tabloid media narrative (especially the world dominating Daily Mail) is one of; if Kate Middleton wears a white dress or eats an avocado it is wholesome loveliness, yet when Meghan Markle wears a white dress or eats an avocado its full on Soviet-era expansionist Communism, that's hardly surprising.
I bet Meghan Markle even had former Labour Prime Ministers to her communist wedding!
Let’s see what @Theuniondivvie says. Whether he can - belatedly - admit it
The threshold for the tax that isn't a tax is pretty high- about 25k. So a newly qualified nurse on 27k is paying about £200 a year, an average nurse on 35k is paying £1000 a year and a nurse near the top of their payscale on about 40k pays about £1500 a year.
One of the neatest cons Sunak has pulled is to make us think about the marginal tax rates rather than the amount we are paying that tax on.
The actual profit the owners take is a fraction of a percent of the ticket price IIRC.
I suspect you are.
Clear enough?
The same will happen to H&M
It is counterproductive. I have some sympathy for the independence cause and if I were living North of the border I would probably be a swing voter on the issue. But then I see this stuff and wonder if this is just Brexit-style identity politics. Blaming the English ("Westminster") rather than Johnny foreigner ("Brussels").
If @StuartDickson came out and said “och, let’s kill all the English firstborn” you’d first ignore it, then you’d say “what about HYUFD’s tanks” then you’d slink off the site for a few hours, leaving a trail of tartan slime, hoping that when you returned the argument might have moved on
Unedifying. Tut
I also know a bit about History of Elizabeth the first, and how it ties in here is how the politicians in her fathers and own court actually used history, with a few modifications, for important tie in with historical figures.
The Holy Roman Empire too also felt it important to tie in with both Julius Caesar and Saint Peter!
The question I am asking is, is it from these politicians in courts doing that we get our history we are taught in schools today?
I never want my future days on an ICU ward managed by a YTS trainee.
It's not even that: excluding the prizes it's good causes 55%, tax 28%, retailers 7.5% and admin/profit 9.5%.
Or are you going to exclude good causes too?
Beth Mead deserves to win, and will win.