It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
Yes, that’s also a factor. An SUV is usually heavier than an estate car, and more people are now buying the SUV.
I was wondering recently if any work is being done to analyse older multi story car-parks and their load bearing capacity. I’m sure it’s not a problem but I would imagine that they calculated weights of cars at the time they were built and potentially, if the average weight of cars has increased dramatically, then there could be issues, same amount of spaces (usually too small for modern cars, especially SUVs) but holding much greater weight.
There's an urban legend at Exeter University that the library, built on a hillside, is travelling downhill an inch or so a year because the architect miscalculated the weight of printed matter
More good news. Gas bills are predicted to fall to under 2500GBP in July as the price of natural gas falls and continues to fall. This should help the govt free up some cash for the nurses.
Also interesting that the ONS suggest that the strikes dragged the growth rate down in November so the true picture may actually be a bit better than what we got. December looks like it will come out in the marginally above or below 0 column so I'd be surprised if we actually get a recession, what's more is that I think there's more upside risk than downside. People are still underestimating the economic activity that is happening on the ground.
Those results from Tesco and Sainsbury's should have everyone adjusting their UK model for 2022 and probably 2023 as well. I wouldn't be surprised now if the UK manages to avoid a recession entirely but instead bumps along the bottom alternating above and below 0% until 2024. A country that has run out of energy led by a government that has run out of energy.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
That’s quite fierce moderation. Banning us from having tattoos. Also not sure how it can be enforced
It would catch those incapable of not oversharing, at least.
I thought Mike would find my suggestion - that I get a tattoo of his genial smiling face on my butt - somewhat cheering. But he seems to have taken it badly. Oh well
He doesn’t realise that if I ever got a taste for pegging then the active pegger would look down and see Mike staring up at them, with a jaunty smile, thereby adding to the gaiety of the nations
That’s quite fierce moderation. Banning us from having tattoos. Also not sure how it can be enforced
If you tell us you have got one, you get banned. Not sure how that is difficult. The police use that method quite a lot. They even manage to get confessions out of people who didn't commit crimes so I guess there is a chance someone without a tattoo could get banned as well.
I'm guessing that the chance of @Dura_Ace not having a tattoo or two is less than 1%.
I think we've discussed them before. I have two full irezumi sleeves (done in Singapore, Hawaii, Hong Kong and the US over the years) and four Russian "Thief In Law" ring tats on my right knuckles (all done in Kiev).
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
Bostrom is a terrible person, his output on AI Risk is overrated drivel. Cheering news, this.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
Biden's Corvette is undeniably cool. All original 67 C2 vert in Goodwood Green that he's owned since new.
Have you done a top 10 and worst 10 of politician's cars yet?
A special mention for Sunak pretending to fill up a car that wasn't even his, surely. I recall that the interior of Boris Johnson's car was as filthy and disorganised as you might expect.
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
We always used to say when it was very dark / bad weather etc , "it is as black as the Earl of Hell's waistcoat", don't see any issue with it even nowadays but sure there would be queues to say there is something wrong with it and it should be banned , is offending this that and the other. Fine not to use certain phrases nowadays but these halfwits with pitchforks digging away in the distant past to try and find fault with people is absolutely pathetic.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
Biden's Corvette is undeniably cool. All original 67 C2 vert in Goodwood Green that he's owned since new.
Have you done a top 10 and worst 10 of politician's cars yet?
A special mention for Sunak pretending to fill up a car that wasn't even his, surely. I recall that the interior of Boris Johnson's car was as filthy and disorganised as you might expect.
I’m thinking of getting a tattoo. Suggestions welcome
I'm thinking of getting a section from one of Dürer's sublime woodcuts but I've yet to find a tatoo artist that I'd be confident has the ability to reproduce them.
Though nothing will ever top this for aging inked flesh.
HARD APPROVE
That’s extremely crisp for a tattoo - so it must have been quite recent or is a fake. Given the errrr… owner, I’m going with fake. Because it matches all the other lies he tells.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
Finally, before I do some work, it seems that investors have realised that the UK economy is nowhere near as bad as the likes of the OECD and IMF have been suggesting. UK focussed shares are up significantly since all of those doom forecasts at the beginning of December took a bite out of share prices.
What I worry about most is that those forecasts are almost egging each other on to become a self fulfilling prophecy, between the BoE, OBR, IMF and OECD we've had nothing but doom and gloom in the headlines about the economy. People's everyday experiences clearly don't line up with those but at the same time it is hurting business investment and confidence. If it turns out we don't head into a recession in 2023 the economists from all four of those bodies need to be hauled in front of Parliament to give us answers on why their models seem to have a systemic bias in them against the UK economy.
Who sent him a copy of Team America on DVD for Christmas?
I recall that Trump previously suggested another attack by US aircraft in Chinese colours. I makes me think that Trump believes that a literal "false flag" would be all it takes to fool adversary nations, and he's certainly stupid enough for that to be plausible.
On tattoos, I was discussing the tradition of Jewish tailoring in Glasgow with one of the local ne’er do wells a few days ago (yes, that’s how we roll in the east end). A lot of it predated WWII but one who was a Holocaust survivor apparently had his camp tattoo surgically removed and framed & hung on the wall of his premises. This sound probably apocryphal and also horribly plausible at the same time.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
Who sent him a copy of Team America on DVD for Christmas?
I recall that Trump previously suggested another attack by US aircraft in Chinese colours. I makes me think that Trump believes that a literal "false flag" would be all it takes to fool adversary nations, and he's certainly stupid enough for that to be plausible.
Trump is absolutely not stupid
He often appears vague and he is deeply eccentric, and riven with narcissistic personality disorders, but actually stupid? No
Because he thinks outside the box he is often way ahead of his rivals. Cf lab leak
Even here it’s not clear he’s dumb. Taking out the serious military/nuke threat of North Korea with a first strike is a pretty good idea - if it can be done without provoking world war 3 or killing 20 million Koreans
More good news. Gas bills are predicted to fall to under 2500GBP in July as the price of natural gas falls and continues to fall. This should help the govt free up some cash for the nurses.
Only 3 x as high as last year, people will be dancing in the streets.
I agree it is all relative but it is good news compared to expectations.
The worry is what happens next Winter.
Given wholesale prices our bills should be plummetting not standing still, some have made a killing out of this in UK. Given other major European countries are going up by very small %, ripoff UK as ever.
I’m thinking of getting a tattoo. Suggestions welcome
I'm thinking of getting a section from one of Dürer's sublime woodcuts but I've yet to find a tatoo artist that I'd be confident has the ability to reproduce them.
Interesting suggestion, since the Irezumi art favoured by DuraAce apparently developed alongside woodcut techniques.
On tattoos, I was discussing the tradition of Jewish tailoring in Glasgow with one of the local ne’er do wells a few days ago (yes, that’s how we roll in the east end). A lot of it predated WWII but one who was a Holocaust survivor apparently had his camp tattoo surgically removed and framed & hung on the wall of his premises. This sound probably apocryphal and also horribly plausible at the same time.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
More good news. Gas bills are predicted to fall to under 2500GBP in July as the price of natural gas falls and continues to fall. This should help the govt free up some cash for the nurses.
Only 3 x as high as last year, people will be dancing in the streets.
I agree it is all relative but it is good news compared to expectations.
The worry is what happens next Winter.
Given wholesale prices our bills should be plummetting not standing still, some have made a killing out of this in UK. Given other major European countries are going up by very small %, ripoff UK as ever.
ISTR some data @rcs1000 posted about three weeks ago, showing UK prices, and UK price increases, as distinctly mid-range in European terms.
Who sent him a copy of Team America on DVD for Christmas?
I recall that Trump previously suggested another attack by US aircraft in Chinese colours. I makes me think that Trump believes that a literal "false flag" would be all it takes to fool adversary nations, and he's certainly stupid enough for that to be plausible.
Trump is absolutely not stupid
He often appears vague and he is deeply eccentric, and riven with narcissistic personality disorders, but actually stupid? No
Because he thinks outside the box he is often way ahead of his rivals. Cf lab leak
Even here it’s not clear he’s dumb. Taking out the serious military/nuke threat of North Korea with a first strike is a pretty good idea - if it can be done without provoking world war 3 or killing 20 million Koreans
where "thinking outside the box" = repeating any bullshit that suits your prejudices
Who sent him a copy of Team America on DVD for Christmas?
I recall that Trump previously suggested another attack by US aircraft in Chinese colours. I makes me think that Trump believes that a literal "false flag" would be all it takes to fool adversary nations, and he's certainly stupid enough for that to be plausible.
Trump is absolutely not stupid
He often appears vague and he is deeply eccentric, and riven with narcissistic personality disorders, but actually stupid? No
Because he thinks outside the box he is often way ahead of his rivals. Cf lab leak
Even here it’s not clear he’s dumb. Taking out the serious military/nuke threat of North Korea with a first strike is a pretty good idea - if it can be done without provoking world war 3 or killing 20 million Koreans
Isn't it now largely accepted that the US or one of it's allies destroyed the Russian gas pipeline and then proceeded to blame it on Russia? It's not exactly unheard of that the US would go down the false flag route.
I mentioned back in November that my mad-as-a-box-of-frogs brother-in-law, Ben, was heading down to Chile to be dropped off on Antarctica for a stroll across the continent to the South Pole.
59 days of solo ski-ing later, dragging a 110kg sled (which did, to be fair, progressively get lightened as he ate his way through his provisions), seven hundred miles through fields of sastrugi (frozen snow-and-ice dunes), blizzards, white-out, pain and fatigue, and up slope after slope to the 9000' above sea-level South Polar Plateau, he arrived at 0430 this morning.
Fortunately he can catch a Twin Otter aircraft back to the drop-off point rather than have to turn around and slog his way back.
Tory MPs seem to have lost their reputation for cool rational decision making about their leaders, so depending on how the May locals go this Summer /early Autumn could be a very difficult time for Mr Sunak, who I dont feel has a hard core faction willing to fight for him personally.. however the Tories have an outstanding capacity to fight elections, I must admit I'd welcome a '97 style wipeout but I dont see it happening (quite yet).
Rishi is helped by the fact the Tories only got 28% in the local elections in May 2019 when the seats up in May were last up, which is not much more than the current average Tory voteshare of about 25/26% anyway.
So while they may lose some seats to Labour, the losses may not be too heavy and the Tories might even pick up a few LD seats given the LDs got 19% in the 2019 locals which is about 10% higher than they are polling now
Generally LD vote share is much higher in Locals than General Elections, that will probably be true this May too.
Yes but the LDs were still polling 13% in the final Yougov before the May 2019 local elections compared to just 9% now in the latest Yougov
We had this discussion yesterday. It's fair to say you have the facts on your side with this one and mine is only a gut feeling or wishful thinking, but it does feel the electorate is in a mood to punish the conservatives and there should be a significant labour vote (according to current polls) for the LDs to squeeze in LD/Tory wards.
What is your gut feeling in places like Surrey?
Most Tory marginal council seats in Surrey already went LD in 2019 anyway.
I don't expect much change in Tory LD marginal wards therefore, albeit there will likely be Tory councillors losing seats to Labour given Labour are polling much higher than the 28% they got in May 2019 and the Tories slightly lower
I did a quick check on a few I am familiar with. I didn't bother with Guildford because it has rather special circumstances (won't go into again here). Mole Valley you are spot on. I didn't realise the extent of the Tory wipe out. There are a few opportunities in Woking even though the Tories lost 4 seats in 2019. Horsell is always a close fight and the Tories held that in 2019. Heathlands and Pyrford look rock solid Tory if you look at 19, but the LDs nearly took both in 21 (they shouldn't be anywhere near close in these two). Things of course change because of local circumstance eg Knaphill and Byfleet used to be rock solid LD, but are now Indy vs Tory fights. And of course I'm not taking into account opportunities for the Tories to regain seats, which they might do.
So I haven't looked at much, but again on the face of it you are correct. However I still have that gut feeling though that the electorate are going to use May as an excuse for a kicking like they often did in the Euros and as can be seen there are several potential LD gains in Woking which really should be solid Tory. Not a lot of opportunities though I grant you, and a lot for the LDs to potentially lose. Will be interesting.
I mentioned back in November that my mad-as-a-box-of-frogs brother-in-law, Ben, was heading down to Chile to be dropped off on Antarctica for a stroll across the continent to the South Pole.
59 days of solo ski-ing later, dragging a 110kg sled (which did, to be fair, progressively get lightened as he ate his way through his provisions), seven hundred miles through fields of sastrugi (frozen snow-and-ice dunes), blizzards, white-out, pain and fatigue, and up slope after slope to the 9000' above sea-level South Polar Plateau, he arrived at 0430 this morning.
Fortunately he can catch a Twin Otter aircraft back to the drop-off point rather than have to turn around and slog his way back.
Who sent him a copy of Team America on DVD for Christmas?
I recall that Trump previously suggested another attack by US aircraft in Chinese colours. I makes me think that Trump believes that a literal "false flag" would be all it takes to fool adversary nations, and he's certainly stupid enough for that to be plausible.
Trump is absolutely not stupid
He often appears vague and he is deeply eccentric, and riven with narcissistic personality disorders, but actually stupid? No
Because he thinks outside the box he is often way ahead of his rivals. Cf lab leak
Even here it’s not clear he’s dumb. Taking out the serious military/nuke threat of North Korea with a first strike is a pretty good idea - if it can be done without provoking world war 3 or killing 20 million Koreans
Isn't it now largely accepted that the US or one of it's allies destroyed the Russian gas pipeline and then proceeded to blame it on Russia? It's not exactly unheard of that the US would go down the false flag route.
The latest theory is that WE did it - the Brits - certainly with the permission of, and perhaps at the suggestion of, and with the assistance of, the USA
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
Yes, it's a fact that heavier vehicles, petrol or electric, increase accident fatality risk, but I don't remember it being particularly newsworthy when it was just increasingly large petrol vehicles. That's the point I was making.
The increasing weight of traditional cars, was somewhat related to the increases in safety technology, both for occupants and pedestrians.
The step-change in weight for electric cars, has not been accompanied by increases in safety technology in the same way.
Most studies on the subject are quite flawed, because the current use case for an EV is quite different to that of a traditional car. In the UK, for example, most are company cars purchased for tax reasons.
I thought it was related to increased market share of SUVs, which are much more dangerous for pedestrians because of the higher vehicle profile, quite apart from the fact they are also heavier.
You'd think the increasing weight of pedestrians themselves would be protective, particularly given the energy absorbing properties of that extra weight... Although maybe pedestrians are not the group with greatest increasing weight.
The distribution of the extra weight isn't uniform, so very little additional cranial protection, for example.
Isn't it that while crash protection for passengers has vastly improved, for pedestrians it has got worse? Not helped by large blind spots on many SUV.
That's one thing I don't get about Tesla's Cybertruck: I just cannot see how it will pass the EU's frontal pedestrian tests. Although IANAE, so might well be wrong.
There’s plenty of US cars, including supercharged versions of the old Corvette and Dodge Charger, that failed European pedestrian impact tests in the past few years. The style is to stick the supercharger on top of the engine, partially sticking out of the bonnet, which is no-no as far as the EU is concerned.
A lot of people don’t realise that Corvettes are really good for storing classified US government documents next to
DOOCY: "Classified materials next to your Corvette?! What were you thinking?"
BIDEN: "My Corvette's in a locked garage so it's not like it's sitting on the street."
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
EVs are certainly heavier, which is part of the reason they have such a smooth ride, and have rapid acceleration despite the weight. They do seem to all come with advanced electronic stability and collision avoidance technology though.
Is there real evidence of increased fatalities and injuries from them? Or is it just based on mass?
According to the story, there has been an increase in the number of deaths to their highest level since 2005. It would be difficult, one imagines, to link any particular death to weight.
Staggering difference UK vs USA. In the UK in 2021 there were 1608 road deaths. Rough calculation, taking account of population, the roads in the USA are 6x more dangerous (or at least fatalities are occurring at 6x the rate.
More driving, poor driving and a reliance on traffic light intersections rather than roundabouts.
It's a few years ago now, admittedly, but an American ex-pat did say that what surprised him about this country was how drink-driving was socially unacceptable here, but merely criminal and hence commonplace in the US. (Although I suppose that these days, any use of psychology to change people's behaviour is seen as sinister in some quarters, judging from the reaction to Boris being nudged into wearing a mask.)
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
It's a long time ago now (1960s/1970s) but I remember we used to catch a "fishy" by the toe.
Finally, before I do some work, it seems that investors have realised that the UK economy is nowhere near as bad as the likes of the OECD and IMF have been suggesting. UK focussed shares are up significantly since all of those doom forecasts at the beginning of December took a bite out of share prices.
What I worry about most is that those forecasts are almost egging each other on to become a self fulfilling prophecy, between the BoE, OBR, IMF and OECD we've had nothing but doom and gloom in the headlines about the economy. People's everyday experiences clearly don't line up with those but at the same time it is hurting business investment and confidence. If it turns out we don't head into a recession in 2023 the economists from all four of those bodies need to be hauled in front of Parliament to give us answers on why their models seem to have a systemic bias in them against the UK economy.
Let us hope we are seeing investment and not another fire sale of British industry to our competitors.
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
It's a long time ago now (1960s/1970s) but I remember we used to catch a "fishy" by the toe.
It was always 'baby' when I was at primary school in the 80s. My kids now say 'tiger'.
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
It's a long time ago now (1960s/1970s) but I remember we used to catch a "fishy" by the toe.
It was always 'baby' when I was at primary school in the 80s. My kids now say 'tiger'.
A quick google suggests "tiger" is prevelant now. But it doesn't make sense to me - tigers don't squeal!
I mentioned back in November that my mad-as-a-box-of-frogs brother-in-law, Ben, was heading down to Chile to be dropped off on Antarctica for a stroll across the continent to the South Pole.
59 days of solo ski-ing later, dragging a 110kg sled (which did, to be fair, progressively get lightened as he ate his way through his provisions), seven hundred miles through fields of sastrugi (frozen snow-and-ice dunes), blizzards, white-out, pain and fatigue, and up slope after slope to the 9000' above sea-level South Polar Plateau, he arrived at 0430 this morning.
Fortunately he can catch a Twin Otter aircraft back to the drop-off point rather than have to turn around and slog his way back.
Is that a reconstruction of what Harry's frostbitten knob looked like as infamously described in his book?
Some calculation on the last 20 local and parliamentary elections in which both Labour and Conservative have defended a prior position, going back to early December.
Average vote share change (not weighted for ward / constituency size): Labour +6.4% Conservative -6.9%
Starting positions for swing measurement: LE 2019 - 7, GE 2019 - 2, LE 2021 - 5, LE 2022 - 6 Average initial vote share position (based on NEV for locals and GE result, weighted for number of elections but not for ward size): Con 32.3 Lab 30.8
Rough real time by election NEV calculation: Con 25.4 Lab 37.2
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
It's a long time ago now (1960s/1970s) but I remember we used to catch a "fishy" by the toe.
It was always 'baby' when I was at primary school in the 80s. My kids now say 'tiger'.
A quick google suggests "tiger" is prevelant now. But it doesn't make sense to me - tigers don't squeal!
Maybe they do if you catch them by their toe. Or if they don't, then don't let the tiger go.
But according to my mate down the pub, you do not need planning permission to fit solar panels on the roof unless your house is listed or in a conservation area. So that would be an easy win for Rishi. It makes you wonder about the rest.
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
The pseudoscience of "IQ" whether it uses that term or not has always been racist, racist through and through, up to its eyebrows, right the way through from Galton to Terman to forcible sterilisation programs in Germany and the USA to Murray and Pinker.
Bostrom is a complete joke and the simulation hypothesis is a classic piece of bullsh*t to distract young people who believe themselves to be clever from thinking about real and important stuff.
"The country has suffered a net outflow of 12,000 wealthy individuals – those with assets and cash of more than $1m (£830,000) – since 2017, with some 1,500 rich individuals leaving in 2022."
UK report, UK consultancy, dollar values to raise the headline "millionaire" count, which then becomes ultra wealthy in the sub head. If you have sold a house and fcked off, $1m makes you hardly even well off these days, not wealthy and never mind ultra.
There may be a story about this, but this is not it.
I mentioned back in November that my mad-as-a-box-of-frogs brother-in-law, Ben, was heading down to Chile to be dropped off on Antarctica for a stroll across the continent to the South Pole.
59 days of solo ski-ing later, dragging a 110kg sled (which did, to be fair, progressively get lightened as he ate his way through his provisions), seven hundred miles through fields of sastrugi (frozen snow-and-ice dunes), blizzards, white-out, pain and fatigue, and up slope after slope to the 9000' above sea-level South Polar Plateau, he arrived at 0430 this morning.
Fortunately he can catch a Twin Otter aircraft back to the drop-off point rather than have to turn around and slog his way back.
Is that a reconstruction of what Harry's frostbitten knob looked like as infamously described in his book?
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
EVs are certainly heavier, which is part of the reason they have such a smooth ride, and have rapid acceleration despite the weight. They do seem to all come with advanced electronic stability and collision avoidance technology though.
Is there real evidence of increased fatalities and injuries from them? Or is it just based on mass?
According to the story, there has been an increase in the number of deaths to their highest level since 2005. It would be difficult, one imagines, to link any particular death to weight.
Staggering difference UK vs USA. In the UK in 2021 there were 1608 road deaths. Rough calculation, taking account of population, the roads in the USA are 6x more dangerous (or at least fatalities are occurring at 6x the rate.
More driving, poor driving and a reliance on traffic light intersections rather than roundabouts.
France used to have an appalling record for deaths caused by road traffic accidents - IIRC they had twice as many per year as Germany. Over the past 20 years they have been doing well in cutting the rate though.
1.3m deaths are caused in the world each year by RTAs.
Of course. Only reasonable for a Tory to go where the money is. That hardly detracts from the conclusions of the report.
Of all of those it's the phasing out of gas boilers that is the most unrealistic.
Well, perhaps it looks unrealistic now, but I have a reasonable degree of confidence that with the attention and investment that it could easily look a lot more realistic in five years time.
A lot of people said that wind energy would never amount to anything and now it is happening.
Yup. Progress towards a sustainable existence is a constant struggle against defeatism. Just as with wind power, the same types who are ridiculing heat pumps and the like now will no doubt be taking credit for them in a couple of decades.
Pointing out the problems and demanding answers is not defeatism, it's realism.
I'm tired of armchair commentators who know nothing about what they're talking about passing judgement on those who do, and have to do all the work, whilst they recline back in blissful spectation.
These are difficult problems,and they need careful thought, planning, resources and investment.
In light of your own remarks commenting about my insight into education that's deliciously ironic.
You didn't provide insight. You provided an expletive ridden and capitalised rant which you seemed to think was a killer argument.
I'd have been happy to take on point well-considered and fact based points.
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
We always used to say when it was very dark / bad weather etc , "it is as black as the Earl of Hell's waistcoat", don't see any issue with it even nowadays but sure there would be queues to say there is something wrong with it and it should be banned , is offending this that and the other. Fine not to use certain phrases nowadays but these halfwits with pitchforks digging away in the distant past to try and find fault with people is absolutely pathetic.
Agree. There are some egregious examples of things in the past that were unacceptable then, but we should not judge everything by todays standards.
Re the Earl of Hell's waistcoat, I'd have imagined it would be red!
Of course. Only reasonable for a Tory to go where the money is. That hardly detracts from the conclusions of the report.
Of all of those it's the phasing out of gas boilers that is the most unrealistic.
Well, perhaps it looks unrealistic now, but I have a reasonable degree of confidence that with the attention and investment that it could easily look a lot more realistic in five years time.
A lot of people said that wind energy would never amount to anything and now it is happening.
But, it's not rhetoric that delivers that - it's people like me that deliver complex infrastructure. And retrofitting tens of millions of homes and their distribution networks (some over a century old) is a mammoth undertaking.
It's also far harder than the cost efficient mass manufacturing of wind turbines and their deployment offshore.
And it's legislation which forces people like you to plan for it. The reality is that a 2033 date means all new properties will have to be properly insulated - and old properties with gas appliances have the best part of another decade to retrofit.
Just kicking the can down the road achieves nothing.
And no doubt nearer the time there will be exemptions for hard cases.
People like me need the government to think through the implications of their policy decisions and consult with industry first on its implications, which they have not done, and then fund it properly, which they have also not done.
I am not arguing for the can being kicked down the road. I am stating when it is likely to be achieved on current trends.
If we want to achieve it earlier then all these things need to be carefully thought through (which requires hard work) and not sniped at or the messenger shot.
At my son's school they've had to reduce the number of science lessons in year 9 because they can't recruit science teachers. This government is running the country into the ground and ruining our childrens' future. Of course their privately educated kids will be fine. I'm so fucking furious with what these idiots are doing to us.
Finally, before I do some work, it seems that investors have realised that the UK economy is nowhere near as bad as the likes of the OECD and IMF have been suggesting. UK focussed shares are up significantly since all of those doom forecasts at the beginning of December took a bite out of share prices.
What I worry about most is that those forecasts are almost egging each other on to become a self fulfilling prophecy, between the BoE, OBR, IMF and OECD we've had nothing but doom and gloom in the headlines about the economy. People's everyday experiences clearly don't line up with those but at the same time it is hurting business investment and confidence. If it turns out we don't head into a recession in 2023 the economists from all four of those bodies need to be hauled in front of Parliament to give us answers on why their models seem to have a systemic bias in them against the UK economy.
At some point this year, the rate of inflation will fall below wage rises.
Azerbaijan is blessed with more than its fair share of beautiful women.
The guys though just look like they will never climb very far up the greasy pole of chartered accountancy. Crazy fast leg action does not compensate.
Yes, I've been to Baku. The women are lovely
They are partly Iranian of course. And Iranian women are *chef's kiss*. It is noticeable in all the vids of the Iranian insurrection - the beauty of the women
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
It's a long time ago now (1960s/1970s) but I remember we used to catch a "fishy" by the toe.
I once looked for academic papers on the usage of the n-word as a term of greeting among the male urban poor in the USA, where it is commonly used black to black, and often black to white or other, but not from white to black. Couldn't find a single paper. Nobody wants to deal with that. Too busy discussing isms in their ivory towers or going to dinner parties or whatever. Or maybe the academics just never meet any black urban working class people and so are unaware of it. But such usage is huge in the USA.
But according to my mate down the pub, you do not need planning permission to fit solar panels on the roof unless your house is listed or in a conservation area. So that would be an easy win for Rishi. It makes you wonder about the rest.
Our house is in a conservation area and we're having to apply for full planning permission for panels on a flat roof that would be completely invisible from the street or back garden.
🟥 UK economy grew 0.1% in November, a big shock - markets thought output would contract 0.3% - and signalling the recession (if there is to be one) could be short lived
Finally, before I do some work, it seems that investors have realised that the UK economy is nowhere near as bad as the likes of the OECD and IMF have been suggesting. UK focussed shares are up significantly since all of those doom forecasts at the beginning of December took a bite out of share prices.
What I worry about most is that those forecasts are almost egging each other on to become a self fulfilling prophecy, between the BoE, OBR, IMF and OECD we've had nothing but doom and gloom in the headlines about the economy. People's everyday experiences clearly don't line up with those but at the same time it is hurting business investment and confidence. If it turns out we don't head into a recession in 2023 the economists from all four of those bodies need to be hauled in front of Parliament to give us answers on why their models seem to have a systemic bias in them against the UK economy.
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
It's a long time ago now (1960s/1970s) but I remember we used to catch a "fishy" by the toe.
I once looked for academic papers on the usage of the n-word as a term of greeting among the male urban poor in the USA, where it is commonly used black to black, and often black to white or other, but not from white to black. Couldn't find a single paper. Nobody wants to deal with that. Too busy discussing isms in their ivory towers or going to dinner parties or whatever. Or maybe the academics just never meet any black urban working class people and so are unaware of it. But such usage is huge in the USA.
You can't do it because quotation of the word is now indistinguishable from direct use of it. You say in a paper "People sometimes say 'Jehovah' " and there's shrieks of He said Jehovah! He said Jehovah!
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
I remember at primary school in the early 80s watching a video which probably wasn't entitled 'don't be racist, kids', in which we found it utterly hilarious that the antagonist was calling the black character 'n****r'. We were aware of the word 'n****r' but had no idea it was pejoratively applied to black people - we just thought it a funny and vaguely rude word. I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
It's a long time ago now (1960s/1970s) but I remember we used to catch a "fishy" by the toe.
I once looked for academic papers on the usage of the n-word as a term of greeting among the male urban poor in the USA, where it is commonly used black to black, and often black to white or other, but not from white to black. Couldn't find a single paper. Nobody wants to deal with that. Too busy discussing isms in their ivory towers or going to dinner parties or whatever. Or maybe the academics just never meet any black urban working class people and so are unaware of it. But such usage is huge in the USA.
That might be because using the n-word, even when employed in an academic context to actively express disapproval of the term, can get you sacked
"Students demand firing of prof who referenced racial slur, saying he threatens their ’emotional well-being’"
Ugh more evidence, if more proof were needed, that the University of Oxford needs to be razed. Also what is it about Swedes and their xenophobia and racism?
An Oxford academic has apologised for a 1996 email in which he wrote: “Blacks are more stupid than whites.”
In the message, Professor Nick Bostrom added: “I won’t have much success with most people if I speak like that . . . [it] seems to be synonymous with: I hate those bloody n*****s!!!!”
The University of Oxford said it had launched an investigation and condemned “in the strongest terms possible the views this particular academic expressed in his communications”.
Bostrom, a Swedish-born philosopher, is director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. He made the comments as part of a mailing list for an internet forum, The Extropians. In a statement published on his website, Bostrom said he chose to apologise — and re-publish the message — after hearing rumours that past comments would be “maliciously framed” and used in “smear campaigns”.
Bostrom said that the Extropians forum had been a place for conversations about “science fiction, future technologies, society and all sorts of random things” but that there was also a lot of “silly, mistaken, or outright offensive stuff”.
I’m surprised his comments were even acceptable back then. I doubt holding him to account for those words would be a smear campaign. But he is the victim here.
Mind you in other race/Uni/woke News, and I am sure @Leon has seen it, fields are racist.
They weren't. Though rather more common to hear back then.
I recall being slightly surprised in the early eighties when a North American took offence over the idiomatic “n*****r in the woodpile” - but it was clear even then that it’s days as acceptable language were numbered…..meanwhile, in a great win for genderists:
"I look forward to a time where awards shows can be reflective of society we live in" -Sam Smith at the Brits , 2021 Wish granted? this year our sexist society is reflected so brilliantly that no women are nominated for best artist Bravo genderists 👏👏
It's pretty astonishing to me that the woodpile phrase was ever acceptable.
One that did surprise me was eeny, meeny, miny, moe. As a kid I understood that we were saying 'nicker' (which I took to mean 'thief') but now I wonder what other children and parents understood by it. I only became aware of the other version after the Clarkson fuss. Should maybe ask my parents.
I've never heard 'nicker' for that. It wa always the bad version.
One I used to hear frequently was "As black as a ****** down a coalmine at night."
Which never made much sense to me, as the 'night' bit is fairly irrelevant if they're in a coalmine. Unless, perhaps, it was an opencast pit. But then I'd realise I was probably overthinking it.
Another one that I still use, and which I'm fairly sure is not at all racist, is "It's a bit black over Bill's mother's", for when there are distant dark clouds threatening rain.
Yep. Makes me wonder if I was the only person saying 'nicker' At that age (primary school) I'd never heard the infamous N-word. I also didn't realise golliewogs were supposed to depict black people - I had no knowledge of the term 'wog' (to me didn't look like a person at all, some kind of weird monster, which is kind of the point, I guess). Sheltered childhood, I guess.
We always used to say when it was very dark / bad weather etc , "it is as black as the Earl of Hell's waistcoat", don't see any issue with it even nowadays but sure there would be queues to say there is something wrong with it and it should be banned , is offending this that and the other. Fine not to use certain phrases nowadays but these halfwits with pitchforks digging away in the distant past to try and find fault with people is absolutely pathetic.
In London there was the phrase "as black as Newgate's knocker" - sometimes used in a racist way, sometimes not, but it probably should be avoided today. Everyone's a "halfwit" for you, Malcolm. There's nothing wrong with trying not to be offensive, nor with updating language.
Unpopular controversial thought.....does the UK need a proper recession to shake out weak businesses and focus on productivity?
I am of the opinion that 2008 approach of companies, supported by government, to try and minimise business failure and amount of unemployment, by encouraging wage reductions / freezes, might have had the unintended consequence that it allowed a lot of weak businesses with poor productivity to continue unreformed. Same with support during COVID.
🟥 UK economy grew 0.1% in November, a big shock - markets thought output would contract 0.3% - and signalling the recession (if there is to be one) could be short lived
The economic data since the start of the year has been on the upside - US inflation and jobs data better than expected and (importantly for Fed rates) wage inflation moderating, better than expected Eurozone inflation and growth and now this. Plus company trading updates have generally - with exceptions of course - been on the upside. I think consumers are quite happy to spend and I suspect not a fair few think that, when push comes to shove, the Government will be there as a backstop.
This is what happens when you try to squeeze the rich. They go away. And everyone else ends up having to pay more.
Who's tried to squeeze the rich?
Have you not been following politics of late? If I was very rich, and I lived in a country where things like wealth taxes were being touted as the answer, or punitive tax rates on high incomes, I'd find somewhere where these things were less likely.
Of course. Only reasonable for a Tory to go where the money is. That hardly detracts from the conclusions of the report.
Of all of those it's the phasing out of gas boilers that is the most unrealistic.
Well, perhaps it looks unrealistic now, but I have a reasonable degree of confidence that with the attention and investment that it could easily look a lot more realistic in five years time.
A lot of people said that wind energy would never amount to anything and now it is happening.
Yup. Progress towards a sustainable existence is a constant struggle against defeatism. Just as with wind power, the same types who are ridiculing heat pumps and the like now will no doubt be taking credit for them in a couple of decades.
Pointing out the problems and demanding answers is not defeatism, it's realism.
I'm tired of armchair commentators who know nothing about what they're talking about passing judgement on those who do, and have to do all the work, whilst they recline back in blissful spectation.
These are difficult problems,and they need careful thought, planning, resources and investment.
In light of your own remarks commenting about my insight into education that's deliciously ironic.
You didn't provide insight. You provided an expletive ridden and capitalised rant which you seemed to think was a killer argument.
I'd have been happy to take on point well-considered and fact based points.
You didn't make them.
Which tells me you didn't read it. Because I rebutted, point by point, what you had listed. True, I used swearing and capitalisations. But there was plenty of fact in there. You didn't at any point even try to show how I hadn't done so - just airily claimed in a fact free fashion that I hadn't done so.
I'm afraid the real issue is that what you posted didn't deserve anything less than swearing and capitalisations, as it was complete and utter nonsense. It was also rude, patronising, ignorant and failed to grapple with the key problems education faces.
If the original report was not as summarised, it may be worth reading. If it was, then it isn't.
Similarly, as you note armchair generals of various sorts generally don't understand what they're talking about. The issue is that bizarrely in education people listen to the armchair generals and dismiss the experts. And then wonder (a) why things aren't working as they expected (b) why teachers get mad at them for talking essentially abusive nonsense.
At my son's school they've had to reduce the number of science lessons in year 9 because they can't recruit science teachers. This government is running the country into the ground and ruining our childrens' future. Of course their privately educated kids will be fine. I'm so fucking furious with what these idiots are doing to us.
Is it always "the government"? They do, of course, have ultimate accountability, but other institutions, not least a very vocal minority of very left wing teachers who believe the "prizes for all" mentality, who seem to bask in their love of mediocrity also have a lot to answer for our poor state school provision. Until those on the left start to realise that improving standards also requires the weeding out of people who encourage those low standards then no public sector organisations will improve. Sadly the Left is the protector of the rights of vested interests to the detriment of pupils, patients and those who receive public sector "service".
Easier to blame the government and those terrible private schools though eh? Left wing thinking = simplistic chippy solutions for complex problems.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
EVs are certainly heavier, which is part of the reason they have such a smooth ride, and have rapid acceleration despite the weight. They do seem to all come with advanced electronic stability and collision avoidance technology though.
Is there real evidence of increased fatalities and injuries from them? Or is it just based on mass?
According to the story, there has been an increase in the number of deaths to their highest level since 2005. It would be difficult, one imagines, to link any particular death to weight.
Staggering difference UK vs USA. In the UK in 2021 there were 1608 road deaths. Rough calculation, taking account of population, the roads in the USA are 6x more dangerous (or at least fatalities are occurring at 6x the rate.
More driving, poor driving and a reliance on traffic light intersections rather than roundabouts.
France used to have an appalling record for deaths caused by road traffic accidents - IIRC they had twice as many per year as Germany. Over the past 20 years they have been doing well in cutting the rate though.
1.3m deaths are caused in the world each year by RTAs.
They're not called RTAs anymore. RTCs because someone important did not like the way "accident" implied no-one caused the collision.
At my son's school they've had to reduce the number of science lessons in year 9 because they can't recruit science teachers. This government is running the country into the ground and ruining our childrens' future. Of course their privately educated kids will be fine. I'm so fucking furious with what these idiots are doing to us.
Is it always "the government"? They do, of course, have ultimate accountability, but other institutions, not least a very vocal minority of very left wing teachers who believe the "prizes for all" mentality, who seem to bask in their love of mediocrity also have a lot to answer for our poor state school provision. Until those on the left start to realise that improving standards also requires the weeding out of people who encourage those low standards then no public sector organisations will improve. Sadly the Left is the protector of the rights of vested interests to the detriment of pupils, patients and those who receive public sector "service".
Easier to blame the government and those terrible private schools though eh? Left wing thinking = simplistic chippy solutions for complex problems.
It's the government who are in charge of both standards and exams - not teachers. If therefore you're not happy with them, ask yourself whether the teaching profession is to blame.
Yes, there are idiots in teaching who act as you describe. But almost none of them are in positions of power, certainly not since the 1970s.
Ironically, the one really progressive classroom teacher (and who was a truly terrible classroom teacher as a result) who made it to the top, as chief of OFSTED, was Chris Woodhead.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
EVs are certainly heavier, which is part of the reason they have such a smooth ride, and have rapid acceleration despite the weight. They do seem to all come with advanced electronic stability and collision avoidance technology though.
Is there real evidence of increased fatalities and injuries from them? Or is it just based on mass?
According to the story, there has been an increase in the number of deaths to their highest level since 2005. It would be difficult, one imagines, to link any particular death to weight.
Staggering difference UK vs USA. In the UK in 2021 there were 1608 road deaths. Rough calculation, taking account of population, the roads in the USA are 6x more dangerous (or at least fatalities are occurring at 6x the rate.
More driving, poor driving and a reliance on traffic light intersections rather than roundabouts.
France used to have an appalling record for deaths caused by road traffic accidents - IIRC they had twice as many per year as Germany. Over the past 20 years they have been doing well in cutting the rate though.
1.3m deaths are caused in the world each year by RTAs.
They're not called RTAs anymore. RTCs because someone important did not like the way "accident" implied no-one caused the collision.
Isn't it more to do with blame in the era of ambulance chasers? Accident implies everybody was blameless, collision is just stating a fact there was a coming together without any implication of blame or not i.e. left up to legal profession.
"The country has suffered a net outflow of 12,000 wealthy individuals – those with assets and cash of more than $1m (£830,000) – since 2017, with some 1,500 rich individuals leaving in 2022."
UK report, UK consultancy, dollar values to raise the headline "millionaire" count, which then becomes ultra wealthy in the sub head. If you have sold a house and fcked off, $1m makes you hardly even well off these days, not wealthy and never mind ultra.
There may be a story about this, but this is not it.
“A bunch of people sold their London townhouses & retired to the Dordogne” doesn’t quite have the same ring to it does it?
Lets see, there are about 5million higher rate taxpayers (source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/number-of-individual-income-taxpayers-by-marginal-rate-gender-and-age ) so if they have an average forty year career, that’s 125,000 retiring each year. I bet most of those have assets worth > £800k on retirement (Bought a house in the 1990s & paid of the mortgage + pension assets gets you there easily). If all of those 1,500 leaving in 2022 were from this demographic that means that about 1% of these people are choosing to exit the country & enjoy retirement elsewhere.
Without more data on who this population are (an age breakdown would help!) this statistic is irrelevant to the story the Telegraph wants to tell.
The bit about the drop in non-doms is actually interesting though. HMRC claims they’ve taken the same amount in tax despite the 50% drop, not sure how that works? I guess the remaining non-doms are earning a lot of UK income & so were paying the majority of the tax raised from non-doms in the first place, which would imply that whilst the “citizens of nowhere” have f’ed off elsewhere those actually invested in the UK have stayed. Not quite the story the Telegraph wanted to tell!
As ever, newspaper spin on statistics is usually a far stronger story than one the stats will actually support.
This is what happens when you try to squeeze the rich. They go away. And everyone else ends up having to pay more.
Who's tried to squeeze the rich?
Have you not been following politics of late? If I was very rich, and I lived in a country where things like wealth taxes were being touted as the answer, or punitive tax rates on high incomes, I'd find somewhere where these things were less likely.
If current touting levels worry you, you'd be changing country every 5 minutes.
Starmer govt will go one of 2 ways: We must do nothing to upset our very slender majority
or
We must do nothing to scare off the first time labour voters who are responsible for our enormous majority
Wealth tax will hit the rock of the stark fact that houses and pensions, are wealth
Plus, other countries are scarcely rolling in money just now.
It's rather bizarre that the example given is the electric Hummer, which weighs 9000 lbs, as opposed to the standard Hummer at 6000 lbs. A better question might be why the f*** does anyone need to drive such an enormous vehicle in the first place? There weren't any complaints about heavy vehicles as petrol cars got bigger and bigger.
Yes there were. From the story:-
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average vehicle weight has reached an all-time record and is predicted to continue rising in the coming years. Vehicle weights dropped considerably in the 1980s compared to highs measured in 1975, but since then the average car and truck has increased from 3,200lbs to 4,200lbs.
EVs are certainly heavier, which is part of the reason they have such a smooth ride, and have rapid acceleration despite the weight. They do seem to all come with advanced electronic stability and collision avoidance technology though.
Is there real evidence of increased fatalities and injuries from them? Or is it just based on mass?
According to the story, there has been an increase in the number of deaths to their highest level since 2005. It would be difficult, one imagines, to link any particular death to weight.
Staggering difference UK vs USA. In the UK in 2021 there were 1608 road deaths. Rough calculation, taking account of population, the roads in the USA are 6x more dangerous (or at least fatalities are occurring at 6x the rate.
More driving, poor driving and a reliance on traffic light intersections rather than roundabouts.
France used to have an appalling record for deaths caused by road traffic accidents - IIRC they had twice as many per year as Germany. Over the past 20 years they have been doing well in cutting the rate though.
1.3m deaths are caused in the world each year by RTAs.
They're not called RTAs anymore. RTCs because someone important did not like the way "accident" implied no-one caused the collision.
This is what happens when you try to squeeze the rich. They go away. And everyone else ends up having to pay more.
Who's tried to squeeze the rich?
Have you not been following politics of late? If I was very rich, and I lived in a country where things like wealth taxes were being touted as the answer, or punitive tax rates on high incomes, I'd find somewhere where these things were less likely.
That's right, can't have anyone in the country even talking about taxing very rich people because they scare so easy. Shouldn't be taxing them at all, much safer to give them extra money to make sure they stick around.
Unpopular controversial thought.....does the UK need a proper recession to shake out weak businesses and focus on productivity?
I am of the opinion that 2008 approach of companies, supported by government, to try and minimise business failure and amount of unemployment, by encouraging wage reductions / freezes, might have had the unintended consequence that it allowed a lot of weak businesses with poor productivity to continue unreformed. Same with support during COVID.
OK so we lose a lot of weak businesses, the economy shrinks and more people are claiming benefits. If productivity goes up but production falls, who gains? If efficiency goes up but more workers are on the dole, who gains? There needs to be some mechanism by which new, better businesses are created.
Of course. Only reasonable for a Tory to go where the money is. That hardly detracts from the conclusions of the report.
Of all of those it's the phasing out of gas boilers that is the most unrealistic.
Well, perhaps it looks unrealistic now, but I have a reasonable degree of confidence that with the attention and investment that it could easily look a lot more realistic in five years time.
A lot of people said that wind energy would never amount to anything and now it is happening.
But, it's not rhetoric that delivers that - it's people like me that deliver complex infrastructure. And retrofitting tens of millions of homes and their distribution networks (some over a century old) is a mammoth undertaking.
It's also far harder than the cost efficient mass manufacturing of wind turbines and their deployment offshore.
And it's legislation which forces people like you to plan for it. The reality is that a 2033 date means all new properties will have to be properly insulated - and old properties with gas appliances have the best part of another decade to retrofit.
Just kicking the can down the road achieves nothing.
And no doubt nearer the time there will be exemptions for hard cases.
People like me need the government to think through the implications of their policy decisions and consult with industry first on its implications, which they have not done, and then fund it properly, which they have also not done.
I am not arguing for the can being kicked down the road. I am stating when it is likely to be achieved on current trends.
If we want to achieve it earlier then all these things need to be carefully thought through (which requires hard work) and not sniped at or the messenger shot.
Regarding funding, the report specifically says: "Moving quickly must include spending money. We know that investing in net zero today will be cheaper than delaying, as well as increasing the economic and climate benefits."
It is precisely an attempt to think through the implications of what accelerating the transition requires. It's not something that can be implemented piecemeal, but rather a framework for rethinking policy wholesale.
Comments
The worry is what happens next Winter.
Those results from Tesco and Sainsbury's should have everyone adjusting their UK model for 2022 and probably 2023 as well. I wouldn't be surprised now if the UK manages to avoid a recession entirely but instead bumps along the bottom alternating above and below 0% until 2024. A country that has run out of energy led by a government that has run out of energy.
Hopefully he will be able to make some sort of recovery.
I don't think it had occurred to anyone in our almost-but-not-quite all white class to be racist before that video was shown.
In my own kids' world, eeny meeny miny moe still exists but one catches a catcher by its toe, which is slightly more poetic and makes no less sense than the original.
He doesn’t realise that if I ever got a taste for pegging then the active pegger would look down and see Mike staring up at them, with a jaunty smile, thereby adding to the gaiety of the nations
Sounds like the perfect spot to store papers from the office…
Who sent him a copy of Team America on DVD for Christmas?
Fine not to use certain phrases nowadays but these halfwits with pitchforks digging away in the distant past to try and find fault with people is absolutely pathetic.
If so, is it a sign that he would con cede?
What I worry about most is that those forecasts are almost egging each other on to become a self fulfilling prophecy, between the BoE, OBR, IMF and OECD we've had nothing but doom and gloom in the headlines about the economy. People's everyday experiences clearly don't line up with those but at the same time it is hurting business investment and confidence. If it turns out we don't head into a recession in 2023 the economists from all four of those bodies need to be hauled in front of Parliament to give us answers on why their models seem to have a systemic bias in them against the UK economy.
ChatGPT is on it
Leon: Please rewrite this more simply: “It would catch those incapable of not oversharing, at least.”
ChatGPT: "It would stop those who share too much information."
Guy Verhofstadt (eclectic collection of 80s Italian rally cars) will win quite easily.
Obviously.
He often appears vague and he is deeply eccentric, and riven with narcissistic personality disorders, but actually stupid? No
Because he thinks outside the box he is often way ahead of his rivals. Cf lab leak
Even here it’s not clear he’s dumb. Taking out the serious military/nuke threat of North Korea with a first strike is a pretty good idea - if it can be done without provoking world war 3 or killing 20 million Koreans
https://youtu.be/jA068jxPduY
About two months into his comeback bid, few prominent Texas Republicans have endorsed Trump — and some are showing more willingness to cross him publicly.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/11/donald-trump-texas-endorsements/
doesn't actually need any thought, though
59 days of solo ski-ing later, dragging a 110kg sled (which did, to be fair, progressively get lightened as he ate his way through his provisions), seven hundred miles through fields of sastrugi (frozen snow-and-ice dunes), blizzards, white-out, pain and fatigue, and up slope after slope to the 9000' above sea-level South Polar Plateau, he arrived at 0430 this morning.
Fortunately he can catch a Twin Otter aircraft back to the drop-off point rather than have to turn around and slog his way back.
So I haven't looked at much, but again on the face of it you are correct. However I still have that gut feeling though that the electorate are going to use May as an excuse for a kicking like they often did in the Euros and as can be seen there are several potential LD gains in Woking which really should be solid Tory. Not a lot of opportunities though I grant you, and a lot for the LDs to potentially lose. Will be interesting.
https://youtu.be/v0z8Lr1cNok
Later!
Truly an icon for the unimaginative.
The ultra-wealthy are deserting the UK, piling extra pressure on public finances
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tax/news/repeated-tax-raids-driving-ultra-wealthy-britain-costing-us/ (£££)
Some calculation on the last 20 local and parliamentary elections in which both Labour and Conservative have defended a prior position, going back to early December.
Average vote share change (not weighted for ward / constituency size):
Labour +6.4%
Conservative -6.9%
Starting positions for swing measurement:
LE 2019 - 7, GE 2019 - 2, LE 2021 - 5, LE 2022 - 6
Average initial vote share position (based on NEV for locals and GE result, weighted for number of elections but not for ward size):
Con 32.3
Lab 30.8
Rough real time by election NEV calculation:
Con 25.4
Lab 37.2
Or if they don't, then don't let the tiger go.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/12/rishi-sunak-stop-start-policies-harming-uk-green-investment-says-net-zero-tsar
But according to my mate down the pub, you do not need planning permission to fit solar panels on the roof unless your house is listed or in a conservation area. So that would be an easy win for Rishi. It makes you wonder about the rest.
Bostrom is a complete joke and the simulation hypothesis is a classic piece of bullsh*t to distract young people who believe themselves to be clever from thinking about real and important stuff.
Dig down, and
"The country has suffered a net outflow of 12,000 wealthy individuals – those with assets and cash of more than $1m (£830,000) – since 2017, with some 1,500 rich individuals leaving in 2022."
UK report, UK consultancy, dollar values to raise the headline "millionaire" count, which then becomes ultra wealthy in the sub head. If you have sold a house and fcked off, $1m makes you hardly even well off these days, not wealthy and never mind ultra.
There may be a story about this, but this is not it.
The guys though just look like they will never climb very far up the greasy pole of chartered accountancy. Crazy fast leg action does not compensate.
1.3m deaths are caused in the world each year by RTAs.
I'd have been happy to take on point well-considered and fact based points.
You didn't make them.
Re the Earl of Hell's waistcoat, I'd have imagined it would be red!
I am not arguing for the can being kicked down the road. I am stating when it is likely to be achieved on current trends.
If we want to achieve it earlier then all these things need to be carefully thought through (which requires hard work) and not sniped at or the messenger shot.
They are partly Iranian of course. And Iranian women are *chef's kiss*. It is noticeable in all the vids of the Iranian insurrection - the beauty of the women
"Students demand firing of prof who referenced racial slur, saying he threatens their ’emotional well-being’"
https://www.thecollegefix.com/students-demand-firing-of-prof-who-referenced-racial-slur-saying-he-threatens-their-emotional-well-being/
It would take an extremely brave professor to write an entire paper on the word. It would probably be career suicide for a white academic
I am of the opinion that 2008 approach of companies, supported by government, to try and minimise business failure and amount of unemployment, by encouraging wage reductions / freezes, might have had the unintended consequence that it allowed a lot of weak businesses with poor productivity to continue unreformed. Same with support during COVID.
If I was very rich, and I lived in a country where things like wealth taxes were being touted as the answer, or punitive tax rates on high incomes, I'd find somewhere where these things were less likely.
I'm afraid the real issue is that what you posted didn't deserve anything less than swearing and capitalisations, as it was complete and utter nonsense. It was also rude, patronising, ignorant and failed to grapple with the key problems education faces.
If the original report was not as summarised, it may be worth reading. If it was, then it isn't.
Similarly, as you note armchair generals of various sorts generally don't understand what they're talking about. The issue is that bizarrely in education people listen to the armchair generals and dismiss the experts. And then wonder (a) why things aren't working as they expected (b) why teachers get mad at them for talking essentially abusive nonsense.
Easier to blame the government and those terrible private schools though eh? Left wing thinking = simplistic chippy solutions for complex problems.
You OK hun?
Yes, there are idiots in teaching who act as you describe. But almost none of them are in positions of power, certainly not since the 1970s.
Ironically, the one really progressive classroom teacher (and who was a truly terrible classroom teacher as a result) who made it to the top, as chief of OFSTED, was Chris Woodhead.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/13/dartmoor-estate-landowner-alexander-darwall-court-case-right-to-camp?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Hopefully even though this is a set back for England we will eventually get something like the right to roam in Scotland but can only imagine a labour or Libdem gov doing it.
Lets see, there are about 5million higher rate taxpayers (source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/number-of-individual-income-taxpayers-by-marginal-rate-gender-and-age ) so if they have an average forty year career, that’s 125,000 retiring each year. I bet most of those have assets worth > £800k on retirement (Bought a house in the 1990s & paid of the mortgage + pension assets gets you there easily). If all of those 1,500 leaving in 2022 were from this demographic that means that about 1% of these people are choosing to exit the country & enjoy retirement elsewhere.
Without more data on who this population are (an age breakdown would help!) this statistic is irrelevant to the story the Telegraph wants to tell.
The bit about the drop in non-doms is actually interesting though. HMRC claims they’ve taken the same amount in tax despite the 50% drop, not sure how that works? I guess the remaining non-doms are earning a lot of UK income & so were paying the majority of the tax raised from non-doms in the first place, which would imply that whilst the “citizens of nowhere” have f’ed off elsewhere those actually invested in the UK have stayed. Not quite the story the Telegraph wanted to tell!
As ever, newspaper spin on statistics is usually a far stronger story than one the stats will actually support.
Starmer govt will go one of 2 ways: We must do nothing to upset our very slender majority
or
We must do nothing to scare off the first time labour voters who are responsible for our enormous majority
Wealth tax will hit the rock of the stark fact that houses and pensions, are wealth
Plus, other countries are scarcely rolling in money just now.
"Moving quickly must include spending money. We know that investing in net zero today will be cheaper than delaying, as well as increasing the economic and climate benefits."
It is precisely an attempt to think through the implications of what accelerating the transition requires.
It's not something that can be implemented piecemeal, but rather a framework for rethinking policy wholesale.