FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
Fear not, Canadian "drinks" seem the equivalent of roughly 1.5 Uk Units, so we are allowed 3.
I think it is an absolutely disgraceful report. My wife (a doctor) has been giving me a hard time about my drinking all morning, forcing me to put up HYUFD type arguments to defend the indefensible
If you’ve been drinking all morning, perhaps she might have a point…
I would have thought the quality of my posts make it clear I do drink all morning.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
Those arguments are interesting because he's not actually in practice denying that the statement of reasons is correct. He's just saying that it's a series of objections that would in the real world be unlikely to cause a problem because there would be so few cases where it applied and therefore its use is wholly disproportionate.
In the latter if the figures he's quoted are right he's obviously correct, but I'm not totally sure that the Supreme Court would agree with him that technicalities are irrelevant. That was the whole basis on which they threw out Sturgeon's referendum petition (albeit that would have had a far more significant impact if allowed).
Ultimately of course that's why it's a good law for both sides in this debate to get het up over. If it was something Sturgeon or Jack really cared about it would never have got to this stage.
In my view they're foolish to use something so emotive as a political football, but then they are both very foolish as they have amply demonstrated in many other ways so that's a bit of case of 'no change.'
The constitutional point is, though, that even if you believe the legislation wholly misconceived, the decision to use s35 in this case shows an extraordinarily narrow interpretation of Scotland's freedom to run its own affairs.
Surely the point of S.35 is that this legislation also affects the affairs of people in England, Wales and NI, over which the Scottish Parliament has no writ.
I thought it was more explicitly that equalities law was reserved - in the same way that Holyrood doesn't have the power to issue a currency, or establish an army.
Not sure if @HYUFD agreed to my wager that it wouldn't be happening over the next two years.
Why anyone would want to be a member of a club that wouldn't have them as a member, however, remains a mystery.
Very misleading BBC headline, as I said before the Church was never going to endorse full gay marriage as doctrine.
If you actually read the article it says prayers will be able to be said for gay marriages and same sex clergy will be able to not be celibate for the first time, which is close to the fudge I predicted.
Though it looks like liberals are still going to try and force a vote on it at Synod next month anyway whatever the Bishops propose
I think you made a typo. You said "liberals" when I think you meant to type "those who are not bigoted homophobes".
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
The only point I will make here is that the test for the second limb of s35 is reasonable belief there will be adverse effects. Not proportionality. Not balancing of interests. Wednesbury unreasonableness. Has the SoS lost his mind to conclude adverse effects? If no, s35 stands.
Falconer’s thread is a very good example for law students of trying to argue the merits of an administrative decision rather than the legality.
UK CPI down to 10.5% in December, from 10.7% in November. Right direction at least.
Disappointing. Thought it would fall more.
Needs those steep fuel price increases of Feb-March last year to drop out. If the Government can keep the various pay disputes unsettled until then, the union's pay claims are going to look that much more greedy.
The unions would be wise to bear that in mind and reach a settlement before that happens.
Not really, unless we get actual and sustained deflation which doesn't seem likely.
No, we just need those massive fuel prices after the invasion of Ukraine to drop out to be replaced by significantly lower numbers, to have a one-off drop in inflation. Diesel going from £1.40 to £1.90 and now £1.75 will do the job. Petrol and heating fuel ditto.
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
A former Lord Chancellor has posted a long twitter thread detailing why he believes the opposite to be true. Its a political football, and not helped by that tool DRoss standing up in the Commons saying it was right the S35 be applied because he lost a debate in Holyrood.
EDIT - that reply you posted from someone pointing out that its about the SoS having "reasonable belief" there is a problem. We're going to see that tested are we not?
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
It just reflects reality. Sadly, alcohol just isn't very good for you in any significant quantity.
From a strict medical perspective, there are probably no benefits at all to alcohol; but when controlled and in moderation I think it can have some significant positive benefits in terms of mental health, it can definetly help with relaxation and sociability. It is different from something like smoking, because the level of harm is much lower.
This just seems like quite tyrannical and puritanical guidelines, just written from an extremely risk averse perspective. if you follow it through to its conclusion you would also try and stop things like horse riding, skiing, motorcycling etc. Probably even cycling on the roads. Boxing? Contact sports? All of this involves 'risk' but that has to be balanced against something like 'personal fulfillment'.
You would expect popular governments to crush this type of thing, but sadly it feels like people are becoming more risk averse, retreating in to virtual lives and away from the idea of freedom.
Good morning. So just like Monday, TPE have cancelled both the 08:00 and 08:07 from Leeds to Manchester. And the 08:30 too, should I have thought about trying to wait for that. So once again it is Northern coming to my rescue.
The 08:07 had set off from Scarborough, got as far as York and was then cancelled due to no crew.
I am attempting to do my Delay Repay claim for Monday, but the site wont even load. TPE, ffs.
I assume it had to have a new crew at York. Otherwise, it's started a bit early on the new driverless trains rollout.
Yes. This is the DfT solution for letting a franchise based on 3 new fleets of trains and a recruitment freeze. Simply remove route cards from your drivers so that they can focus on driving multiple types of train on fewer routes. So your Scarborough - Liverpool train now needs 3 drivers.
This is why there hasn't been the Tories' hoped-for backlash against the striking rail staff. For millions of rail users the service is useless on non-strike days. If anything its more reliable on strike days as the reduced timetable is more resilient!
Each day it is a lottery as to which trains will run and which will be cancelled. Why they didn't strip back the timetable to fewer trains that could be relied on to run I have no idea.
Reports coming in of a Ukranian civilian helicopter crash in Kiev.
A helicopter has crashed in a residential area in Brovary, east of Kyiv. Head of the National Police Ihor Klymenko says The leadership of the Ministry of Internal Affairs died as a result of the plane crash.” Interior Minister Denys Monastyrsky among them. 16 dead; 2 children. https://mobile.twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1615627048671666177
Oh crap, if that’s confirmed. Ukranian equivalent of Home Secretary. Accident, sabotage, or shot down? Very worrying.
Pretty sure it's official. Christopher Miller is a highly reputable journalist on the spot - and I see it's just been reported on the BBC, too.
Grim news.
Seems to be everywhere now, not good at all.
Fingers crossed it turns out to be just another civilian helicopter malfunction, rather than a bad actor.
Blue (and yellow) on blue is another distinct possibility - AFU shot down one of their own Fulcrums with an SA-8 last week. The Mi-8 (which I assume it was) actually has a not bad safety record by RW standards. Redundant generators, very robust gearbox, etc.
For all that I am a tax cutting advocate, this seems entirely sensible to me. A period of stability with no changes except those which are absolutely necessary. One of the curses of the UK system is constant, unending and unnecessary tinkering for short term political advantage.
More seriously, insane advice like that puritan bullcrap from coffin dodging Canuck quacks - have no drinks a week, but if you must, have two drinks a week - is so ridiculously outside normal human experience it will get laughed at, and roundly ignored. It’s therefore not just valueless it is counter productive
What’s the point in two drinks? You might get mildly tipsy for 3 minutes and then the rest of the week you’re still in fucking Winnipeg. Stone cold sober. In the permafrost
So people will continue to drink but without any guidance whatsoever, because the only guidance they have is laughably absurd
Docs should start levellling with people.
“Drinking is fine in moderation. The benefits - socialisation, mental anaesthesia, laughing a lot - probably outweigh any disbenefits for the vast majority of people. Moderation is half a bottle of wine a day for women, maybe 3/4 a bottle for men. Have dry days tho. Every week. Two in a row if poss. Also, some people can get away with drinking a lot more, but you might not be one of them, so be really careful, and some people sadly can’t drink much at all, so make sure you’re not one of them either
If you ever vomit from booze, or lose memory of evenings, or black out, you are definitely drinking too much. Go see a doc”
There, that’s my advice, and it’s better than the shite from these twats in Toronto
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
A former Lord Chancellor has posted a long twitter thread detailing why he believes the opposite to be true. Its a political football, and not helped by that tool DRoss standing up in the Commons saying it was right the S35 be applied because he lost a debate in Holyrood.
The most hilarious commentary is from the self deceiving numpties claiming this has all been 'engineered' by the Nats. An actual Scotch expert:
Good morning. So just like Monday, TPE have cancelled both the 08:00 and 08:07 from Leeds to Manchester. And the 08:30 too, should I have thought about trying to wait for that. So once again it is Northern coming to my rescue.
The 08:07 had set off from Scarborough, got as far as York and was then cancelled due to no crew.
I am attempting to do my Delay Repay claim for Monday, but the site wont even load. TPE, ffs.
Even before COVID and the strikes TPE were awful.
There was a small sweet spot in February / early March 2020 when they had recovered from the December timetable change, the new service trains had settled in a bit (albeit Middlesboro never rolled out its Nova 3/68 locos) and rosters hadn't yet been messed about with, when it was actually quite nice.
UK CPI down to 10.5% in December, from 10.7% in November. Right direction at least.
Disappointing. Thought it would fall more.
Needs those steep fuel price increases of Feb-March last year to drop out. If the Government can keep the various pay disputes unsettled until then, the union's pay claims are going to look that much more greedy.
The unions would be wise to bear that in mind and reach a settlement before that happens.
Not really, unless we get actual and sustained deflation which doesn't seem likely.
No, we just need those massive fuel prices after the invasion of Ukraine to drop out to be replaced by significantly lower numbers, to have a one-off drop in inflation. Diesel going from £1.40 to £1.90 and now £1.75 will do the job. Petrol and heating fuel ditto.
The inflation has already happened. It doesn’t go away. It compounds.
Unless you’re hoping for deflation, which as far as I understand it is bad news.
UK CPI down to 10.5% in December, from 10.7% in November. Right direction at least.
Disappointing. Thought it would fall more.
Needs those steep fuel price increases of Feb-March last year to drop out. If the Government can keep the various pay disputes unsettled until then, the union's pay claims are going to look that much more greedy.
The unions would be wise to bear that in mind and reach a settlement before that happens.
Not really, unless we get actual and sustained deflation which doesn't seem likely.
No, we just need those massive fuel prices after the invasion of Ukraine to drop out to be replaced by significantly lower numbers, to have a one-off drop in inflation. Diesel going from £1.40 to £1.90 and now £1.75 will do the job. Petrol and heating fuel ditto.
This is what has happened with the latest figures in Ireland. Large drops in road fuel and heating oil prices, partially offset by increasing prices of food. This resulted in a negative inflation figure for the month in Ireland, but +0.4% for the month in Britain.
So you should be seeing negative monthly figures now, but you're not. Suggests there is a problem, and that waiting for the past large increases to fall out of the figures won't help you as much as you hope.
Good morning. So just like Monday, TPE have cancelled both the 08:00 and 08:07 from Leeds to Manchester. And the 08:30 too, should I have thought about trying to wait for that. So once again it is Northern coming to my rescue.
The 08:07 had set off from Scarborough, got as far as York and was then cancelled due to no crew.
I am attempting to do my Delay Repay claim for Monday, but the site wont even load. TPE, ffs.
I assume it had to have a new crew at York. Otherwise, it's started a bit early on the new driverless trains rollout.
Yes. This is the DfT solution for letting a franchise based on 3 new fleets of trains and a recruitment freeze. Simply remove route cards from your drivers so that they can focus on driving multiple types of train on fewer routes. So your Scarborough - Liverpool train now needs 3 drivers.
This is why there hasn't been the Tories' hoped-for backlash against the striking rail staff. For millions of rail users the service is useless on non-strike days. If anything its more reliable on strike days as the reduced timetable is more resilient!
Each day it is a lottery as to which trains will run and which will be cancelled. Why they didn't strip back the timetable to fewer trains that could be relied on to run I have no idea.
Shambles.
You know why - the DfT won't let them. A significant driver of the chaos through November was the mas cancellation of services on some routes every day to allow driver training. TPE south to Cleethorpes being the worst example.
New timetable came in over a month ago. And its still chaos. Because drivers and guards 1sign too small a section of the route these services operate on. One of them missing for one of the multiple crew changes? Cancel it - and a chunk of the rest of the diagram.
They tried to "fix" Scarborough by reducing it to a shuttle to York. And you still get 3 hour gaps. They are hopeless, but "just renationalise them" won't help. The private sector consortium which is DOLR (the "nationalised" operator) has no spare capacity to take on another operator. And is banned by the DfT from getting more people to do so. And even if that happened it would still take many many months to get a new management team in place, reach an agreement with train crew over rostering and then fix the damage by retraining everyone on wider route cards.
More seriously, insane advice like that puritan bullcrap from coffin dodging Canuck quacks - have no drinks a week, but if you must, have two drinks a week - is so ridiculously outside normal human experience it will get laughed at, and roundly ignored. It’s therefore not just valueless it is counter productive
What’s the point in two drinks? You might get mildly tipsy for 3 minutes and then the rest of the week you’re still in fucking Winnipeg. Stone cold sober. In the permafrost
So people will continue to drink but without any guidance whatsoever, because the only guidance they have is laughably absurd
Docs should start levellling with people.
“Drinking is fine in moderation. The benefits - socialisation, mental anaesthesia, laughing a lot - probably outweigh any disbenefits for the vast majority of people. Moderation is half a bottle of wine a day for women, maybe 3/4 a bottle for men. Have dry days tho. Every week. Two in a row if poss. Also, some people can get away with drinking a lot more, but you might not be one of them, so be really careful, and some people sadly can’t drink much at all, so make sure you’re not one of them either
If you ever vomit from booze, or lose memory of evenings, or black out, you are definitely drinking too much. Go see a doc”
There, that’s my advice, and it’s better than the shite from these twats in Toronto
And after you hit 60 if you are shortening your life you are buying yourself out of 5 years dementedly fouling yourself in care. Win win.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
With practice, a bottle of wine (especially a sensible one at 12.5%), drunk over two hours, really isn't disabling. Non drinkers and light drinkers underestimate how much heavy drinkers drink.
I don't do it these days, but for many years I would happily drink a bottle of red with dinner then pop to the pub to see mates for two or three beers to gently maintain the buzz.
Not sure if @HYUFD agreed to my wager that it wouldn't be happening over the next two years.
Why anyone would want to be a member of a club that wouldn't have them as a member, however, remains a mystery.
Very misleading BBC headline, as I said before the Church was never going to endorse full gay marriage as doctrine.
If you actually read the article it says prayers will be able to be said for gay marriages and same sex clergy will be able to not be celibate for the first time, which is close to the fudge I predicted.
Though it looks like liberals are still going to try and force a vote on it at Synod next month anyway whatever the Bishops propose
I think you made a typo. You said "liberals" when I think you meant to type "those who are not bigoted homophobes".
By which I assume you mean the evangelicals? I don't agree with the evangelicals on this but they are entitled to their view
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
I’m probably understating,TBH
But I feel fine at this level of intake. I am rarely ill. I also exercise a LOT, I do not smoke, and I eat very healthily. I walk and swim and go to the gym. I cut out all the other drugs 20 years ago
My Dad is a big drinker and he is still (just about) with us age 87 (and still drinking)
I wonder if I am just lucky (inshallah, touch wood, please don’t hit me God) and maybe blessed with a fairly robust constitution. I would not recommend my level of intake to anyone as a GOOD thing. You need to know yourself
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
A former Lord Chancellor has posted a long twitter thread detailing why he believes the opposite to be true. Its a political football, and not helped by that tool DRoss standing up in the Commons saying it was right the S35 be applied because he lost a debate in Holyrood.
EDIT - that reply you posted from someone pointing out that its about the SoS having "reasonable belief" there is a problem. We're going to see that tested are we not?
And, other equally distinguished jurists consider that the S o S's action was quite lawful. Disagreement among lawyers is hardly unusual.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
A former Lord Chancellor has posted a long twitter thread detailing why he believes the opposite to be true. Its a political football, and not helped by that tool DRoss standing up in the Commons saying it was right the S35 be applied because he lost a debate in Holyrood.
The most hilarious commentary is from the self deceiving numpties claiming this has all been 'engineered' by the Nats. An actual Scotch expert:
It isn't even an SNP issue. Labour and the LibDems also deeply unhappy that a bill that was heavily debated and consulted on, then received cross-party support has been quashed by the Tories because they couldn't even whip their own MSPs to vote as one and lost the argument.
Again, I don't really care about preserving the GRR bill. I do care about basic democracy where we have a devolved parliament being overruled by Westminster when the government thinks it will play well in its culture war against whatever they think woke is this week.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
When over 60% of Scots oppose Sturgeon's Bill that is not good for the SNP
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
A former Lord Chancellor has posted a long twitter thread detailing why he believes the opposite to be true. Its a political football, and not helped by that tool DRoss standing up in the Commons saying it was right the S35 be applied because he lost a debate in Holyrood.
The most hilarious commentary is from the self deceiving numpties claiming this has all been 'engineered' by the Nats. An actual Scotch expert:
Yes, it’s totally preposterous that the Scottish government are trying to engineer a row, about something over which they were repeatedly warned over the past few months would overreach their devolved powers.
Edit: Nats all co-ordinating “since 2016” and “six years”, as if this wasn’t something they passed only a fortnight ago.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
A former Lord Chancellor has posted a long twitter thread detailing why he believes the opposite to be true. Its a political football, and not helped by that tool DRoss standing up in the Commons saying it was right the S35 be applied because he lost a debate in Holyrood.
The most hilarious commentary is from the self deceiving numpties claiming this has all been 'engineered' by the Nats. An actual Scotch expert:
It isn't even an SNP issue. Labour and the LibDems also deeply unhappy that a bill that was heavily debated and consulted on, then received cross-party support has been quashed by the Tories because they couldn't even whip their own MSPs to vote as one and lost the argument.
Again, I don't really care about preserving the GRR bill. I do care about basic democracy where we have a devolved parliament being overruled by Westminster when the government thinks it will play well in its culture war against whatever they think woke is this week.
Presumably there will be a fight in the courts and we will find out who is legally (rather than politically) right.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
1 bottle a day is definitely a lot if you don't drink to that level but also much less if you do.....
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
Iirc, helicopters overall get something like 1.5-2x the passenger miles per fatality as road cars, but don't know if that is in a UK context where cars are safer than elsewhere.
For planes and rail we're talking orders of magnitude safer than cars.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
Drinking because of existence is, to me, somewhere between a waste and a bad sign.
The classic in the City is people living on coffee all day. Then a "tightener" or 2 every evening to sleep. Both escalate until the doctor calls a halt, usually after a medical scare.
You can easily spot those - they are always drinking vast amounts of water on doctors advice and not touching the coffee. Plus looking 1 million percent happier and healthier.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
A bottle a day is pretty standard, because if God wasn't OK with it why did he make bottles that size? I would be genuinely happy if Brexit had led to wine coming in pints, because half bottles are too small to bother with.
More seriously, insane advice like that puritan bullcrap from coffin dodging Canuck quacks - have no drinks a week, but if you must, have two drinks a week - is so ridiculously outside normal human experience it will get laughed at, and roundly ignored. It’s therefore not just valueless it is counter productive
What’s the point in two drinks? You might get mildly tipsy for 3 minutes and then the rest of the week you’re still in fucking Winnipeg. Stone cold sober. In the permafrost
So people will continue to drink but without any guidance whatsoever, because the only guidance they have is laughably absurd
Docs should start levellling with people.
“Drinking is fine in moderation. The benefits - socialisation, mental anaesthesia, laughing a lot - probably outweigh any disbenefits for the vast majority of people. Moderation is half a bottle of wine a day for women, maybe 3/4 a bottle for men. Have dry days tho. Every week. Two in a row if poss. Also, some people can get away with drinking a lot more, but you might not be one of them, so be really careful, and some people sadly can’t drink much at all, so make sure you’re not one of them either
If you ever vomit from booze, or lose memory of evenings, or black out, you are definitely drinking too much. Go see a doc”
There, that’s my advice, and it’s better than the shite from these twats in Toronto
It is what it is. Scientists producing and publishing data that shows the risks, and they say guidance should be a continuum of risk rather than a set level, although that does not make it through the media sensalisations.
A positive for heavy drinkers for the report is that it shows each drink more or less moves you up or down the spectrum of risk - contrary to some earlier public guidance that suggest less than x is safe, more than x risky.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
When over 60% of Scots oppose Sturgeon's Bill that is not good for the SNP
The bill was widely attacked and not always factually. It may well have caused trouble for the cross-party MSPs who voted for it. But it appears to be dead now and replaced by a new issue. Do MSPs have the right to vote through bills on devolved matters without that whining shit Ross going down to Westminster and getting it vetoed?
His contribution to yesterday's Westminster debate was telling. All about why the bill was wrong, not about why there is constitutional risk in rUK. All about how he couldn't even whip the Tory MSPs into opposition, had to give them a free vote, and was outvoted.
A Westminster Tory veto of Holyrood is the issue now, not the popularity or whys and wherefores of a dead bill.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
You can autorotate a helicopter if the blades are still attached but you have to decide (and decide quickly) whether you're trying to minimise descent rate (so all aboard don't perish in a maelstrom of twisted metal) or maximise distance to get somewhere more favourable for a landing. The parameters for the decisions are conditioned by air density and the characteristics of the helicopter so you'd better have done your homework.
In the US forces if you pull off an autorotate and live to tell about it you get the 'Broken Wing' award.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
A bottle a day is pretty standard, because if God wasn't OK with it why did he make bottles that size? I would be genuinely happy if Brexit had led to wine coming in pints, because half bottles are too small to bother with.
Too much for one not enough for two is I believe the official categorisation according to Boris Winston.
Albeit he was talking about champagne presumably as a sharpener before his proper drinking began.
More seriously, insane advice like that puritan bullcrap from coffin dodging Canuck quacks - have no drinks a week, but if you must, have two drinks a week - is so ridiculously outside normal human experience it will get laughed at, and roundly ignored. It’s therefore not just valueless it is counter productive
What’s the point in two drinks? You might get mildly tipsy for 3 minutes and then the rest of the week you’re still in fucking Winnipeg. Stone cold sober. In the permafrost
So people will continue to drink but without any guidance whatsoever, because the only guidance they have is laughably absurd
Docs should start levellling with people.
“Drinking is fine in moderation. The benefits - socialisation, mental anaesthesia, laughing a lot - probably outweigh any disbenefits for the vast majority of people. Moderation is half a bottle of wine a day for women, maybe 3/4 a bottle for men. Have dry days tho. Every week. Two in a row if poss. Also, some people can get away with drinking a lot more, but you might not be one of them, so be really careful, and some people sadly can’t drink much at all, so make sure you’re not one of them either
If you ever vomit from booze, or lose memory of evenings, or black out, you are definitely drinking too much. Go see a doc”
There, that’s my advice, and it’s better than the shite from these twats in Toronto
And after you hit 60 if you are shortening your life you are buying yourself out of 5 years dementedly fouling yourself in care. Win win.
I sometimes use this thought to justify my own booze and fags lifestyle but I'm kidding myself. Instead of that earlier 'clean' death what's just as likely - probably more likely - is I advance the point when ill health kicks in. So my last few years are still a misery but they happen sooner.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
This will be the third time the SNP have been told they were exceeding their powers - the first two in the courts. Did either of the earlier two see a surge in support for independence? The first rebuff was over children’s rights, which one might think a more sympathetic case than the current one.
Alistair Jack’s statement seemed pretty cogent to me.
A former Lord Chancellor has posted a long twitter thread detailing why he believes the opposite to be true. Its a political football, and not helped by that tool DRoss standing up in the Commons saying it was right the S35 be applied because he lost a debate in Holyrood.
The most hilarious commentary is from the self deceiving numpties claiming this has all been 'engineered' by the Nats. An actual Scotch expert:
Westminster when the government thinks it will play well in its culture war against whatever they think woke is this week.
I don’t know if you listened to Jack in the HoC yesterday but he stuck strictly to his constitutional brief, saying he hoped the SNP government would work with Westminster to deliver a law both parties were happy with. Meanwhile Sturgeon on the BBC was accusing the government of bad faith…
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
Iirc, helicopters overall get something like 1.5-2x the passenger miles per fatality as road cars, but don't know if that is in a UK context where cars are safer than elsewhere.
For planes and rail we're talking orders of magnitude safer than cars.
I have done somewhere north of 700 chopper flights in my time. I don't like them very much as they are noisy and uncomfortable but we were always told that, statistically, the most dangerous part of our journey was the taxi to the heliport. Mind you I was in a chopper that got into trouble in the Mediterranean off Tunisia back in 1989. That was not a nice experience.
Plus look at our society. Try to buy a Birthday/Anniversary/Congratulations on your New Job/Happy 10th Birthday card and 85% of them use some droll alcohol/gin reference.
We get plastered, blotto, sloshed, etc. All vaguely heroic-sounding states.
Go to LHR or any airport at 8.30am and the bars are chock full with people drinking.
Then go to A&E on a Friday or Saturday night and see what this causes.
As I, ahem, may have mentioned I used to do doorwork in Central London on Fridays and Saturdays and although Friday was marginally better (people simply not having had enough time to get fuelled up), Saturdays were often carnage.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
A bottle a day is pretty standard, because if God wasn't OK with it why did he make bottles that size? I would be genuinely happy if Brexit had led to wine coming in pints, because half bottles are too small to bother with.
IIRC Pol Roger were muttering about maybe doing a Churchill sized bottle. But that has got lost in the red tape question of 500ml vs 568ml for a "Pint" bottle (if the 500, then quite a few countries might allow it as a standard size) and the cost of new format.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
A bottle a day is pretty standard, because if God wasn't OK with it why did he make bottles that size? I would be genuinely happy if Brexit had led to wine coming in pints, because half bottles are too small to bother with.
Too much for one not enough for two is I believe the official categorisation according to Boris Winston.
Albeit he was talking about champagne presumably as a sharpener before his proper drinking began.
His sharpener was actually a tumbler of scotch in his bathroom in the morning. He called it his “mouthwash”. Or so the anecdote has it
It is remarkable to think that our greatest prime minister got the nation through its greatest crisis, and achieved perhaps its greatest triumph, while being completely shitfaced 85% of the waking day
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
Iirc, helicopters overall get something like 1.5-2x the passenger miles per fatality as road cars, but don't know if that is in a UK context where cars are safer than elsewhere.
For planes and rail we're talking orders of magnitude safer than cars.
I have done somewhere north of 700 chopper flights in my time. I don't like them very much as they are noisy and uncomfortable but we were always told that, statistically, the most dangerous part of our journey was the taxi to the heliport. Mind you I was in a chopper that got into trouble in the Mediterranean off Tunisia back in 1989. That was not a nice experience.
The helicopters in the North Sea, are some of the most regulated and highly maintained helicopters in the world. Every few years, one still randomly falls out of the sky.
Helicopters are a freak of nature, and there’s way too many unavoidable single points of failure in most of them.
It is however true, that the NS helos are safer than the drive to the airport.
As the old saw goes, “tee totallers don’t live longer, it just feels longer….”
Said by smug drinkers, trying to make out that their pissed existence is so much more fulfilling.
A huge amount of drinking gets started by social peer pressure to conform. I've had it all my life. Especially strong in a law firm I worked at, where at least 5 of the partners were functioning alcoholics.
Not sure if @HYUFD agreed to my wager that it wouldn't be happening over the next two years.
Why anyone would want to be a member of a club that wouldn't have them as a member, however, remains a mystery.
Very misleading BBC headline, as I said before the Church was never going to endorse full gay marriage as doctrine.
If you actually read the article it says prayers will be able to be said for gay marriages and same sex clergy will be able to not be celibate for the first time, which is close to the fudge I predicted.
Though it looks like liberals are still going to try and force a vote on it at Synod next month anyway whatever the Bishops propose
I think you made a typo. You said "liberals" when I think you meant to type "those who are not bigoted homophobes".
By which I assume you mean the evangelicals? I don't agree with the evangelicals on this but they are entitled to their view
The spin is that this is a substantial move, though it will be interesting to see how well the line that the Church will bless SSM as long as it hasn't done them itself will stick.
Maybe this is the price of not wanting another class of flying bishops.
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
The key issue with a chopper is the gear box rather than the engine. If there is an engine failure helicopters have the ability to autorotate - disconnecting the engine using the air flow through the rotors to provide lift. It is dangerous but in an emergency it can work. Most of the fatal accidents in the North Sea have been due to gear box failures.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
A bottle a day is pretty standard, because if God wasn't OK with it why did he make bottles that size? I would be genuinely happy if Brexit had led to wine coming in pints, because half bottles are too small to bother with.
Half bottles look and feel silly. Way to drink half a bottle - which is enough unless 'partying' (which is rare to never at 62) - is from a full one then pop that cork back in and replace on the sideboard. It looks good standing there, started not finished, till another day. Like a stilllife.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
The only point in dry January, lent etc is to prove that that is not true
I am off to Kenya for 2 weeks with people who make Australians look teetotal, planning dry February when I get back. At least it's not a leap year.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
A bottle a day is pretty standard, because if God wasn't OK with it why did he make bottles that size? I would be genuinely happy if Brexit had led to wine coming in pints, because half bottles are too small to bother with.
Half bottles look and feel silly. Way to drink half a bottle - which is enough unless 'partying' (which is rare to never at 62) - is from a full one then pop that cork back in and replace on the sideboard. It looks good standing there, started not finished, till another day. Like a stilllife.
It also shows that you can put a cork in it, so to speak.
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
Iirc, helicopters overall get something like 1.5-2x the passenger miles per fatality as road cars, but don't know if that is in a UK context where cars are safer than elsewhere.
For planes and rail we're talking orders of magnitude safer than cars.
I have done somewhere north of 700 chopper flights in my time. I don't like them very much as they are noisy and uncomfortable but we were always told that, statistically, the most dangerous part of our journey was the taxi to the heliport. Mind you I was in a chopper that got into trouble in the Mediterranean off Tunisia back in 1989. That was not a nice experience.
Glad you made it through. I've only been in a helicopter twice - both times horizontal as a medical evacuation, so I didn't even get to see the view, just had the noise.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
Er, with all due respect, how the fuck do you know? We’ve never met
I ENJOY drinking. Indeed I love it. I love the buzz of that first cracking gin and tonic. I love the discovery of a new red from some mad place. I love the mouthfeel of an excellent margarita, the salt on the lips, crunchy, and intoxicating. MMMMMM. I love a picnic in sunny English countryside knowing there’s a chilled bottle of Nyetimber or Meursault waiting to go with the cheese and strawberries and jamon iberica de bellota
It also makes meals much more enjoyable, it makes socialising smoother and happier, it gives the day a delicious structure. You work hard, you go the gym, you meet and you greet, and then there is your reward. BOOZE
God would not have made wine so enjoyable if he did not want us to get rat faced
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
Drinking because of existence is, to me, somewhere between a waste and a bad sign.
The classic in the City is people living on coffee all day. Then a "tightener" or 2 every evening to sleep. Both escalate until the doctor calls a halt, usually after a medical scare.
You can easily spot those - they are always drinking vast amounts of water on doctors advice and not touching the coffee. Plus looking 1 million percent happier and healthier.
Yes, and the rest. If I hadn't stopped working when I was 48 I'd be dead now, I think. Rather than being 62.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
The parameters for the decisions are conditioned by air density and the characteristics of the helicopter
And presumably the number of Somali warlords in the vicinity?
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
The key issue with a chopper is the gear box rather than the engine. If there is an engine failure helicopters have the ability to autorotate - disconnecting the engine using the air flow through the rotors to provide lift. It is dangerous but in an emergency it can work. Most of the fatal accidents in the North Sea have been due to gear box failures.
The other issue - as probably with the Ukraine incident - is flying VFR at low level, and (for example) suddenly encountering low visibility conditions.
Using helos as a taxi on land brings a very different set of risks to North Sea flights on regular ferry routes.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
A bottle a day is pretty standard, because if God wasn't OK with it why did he make bottles that size? I would be genuinely happy if Brexit had led to wine coming in pints, because half bottles are too small to bother with.
Too much for one not enough for two is I believe the official categorisation according to Boris Winston.
Albeit he was talking about champagne presumably as a sharpener before his proper drinking began.
I have been tracking my daily consumption on an app since 2017. I'm generally in the low to mid 30s units per week but it goes up during holidays. The ABV of the drinks makes a huge difference: half a bottle of a 14.5% Rhone red is very different from half a bottle of an 11.5% English white. Even more so with beer - a pint of 6.5% craft beer is really quite a lot of alcohol whereas a 3.5% pint of mild is virtually teetotal.
I am happy to seize on reports like this one in the Times. It does seem there is probably a tipping point, between relatively healthy and happy on quite a lot of alcohol, and heading towards an early grave from cancer or cirrhosis on a tiny bit more. I just wish doctors were able to specify exactly where.
I agree that the tiny limits some medics come up with don't help. They're like the safety advice for avoiding skin cancer on sunny days: wear a long sleeved shirt, a wide brimmed hat and factor 50 sunblock at all times, and even then make sure you always sit in the shade. Ideally indoors. Then wonder why your knee joints started going a bit wobbly.
Plus look at our society. Try to buy a Birthday/Anniversary/Congratulations on your New Job/Happy 10th Birthday card and 85% of them use some droll alcohol/gin reference.
We get plastered, blotto, sloshed, etc. All vaguely heroic-sounding states.
Go to LHR or any airport at 8.30am and the bars are chock full with people drinking.
Then go to A&E on a Friday or Saturday night and see what this causes.
As I, ahem, may have mentioned I used to do doorwork in Central London on Fridays and Saturdays and although Friday was marginally better (people simply not having had enough time to get fuelled up), Saturdays were often carnage.
The UK does have a fantastically ugly relationship with alcohol. Only Russia comes close in my experience.
Since my early 20s I've only ever had one tot of pusser's on Taranto Night and that's it for the year but I jacked that in about 5 years when we ran out and I couldn't be arsed to get another bottle. What I've noticed is that other people can be quite fantastically discommoded if you refuse to drink,
As the old saw goes, “tee totallers don’t live longer, it just feels longer….”
Said by smug drinkers, trying to make out that their pissed existence is so much more fulfilling.
A huge amount of drinking gets started by social peer pressure to conform. I've had it all my life. Especially strong in a law firm I worked at, where at least 5 of the partners were functioning alcoholics.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
For your 30 cases do you buy it (mixed, presumably) case by case or bottle by bottle. Or is your spare room filled to the ceiling with cases from Octavian? The logistics of buying a case of wine every 10 days or so are surely formidable.
Not sure if @HYUFD agreed to my wager that it wouldn't be happening over the next two years.
Why anyone would want to be a member of a club that wouldn't have them as a member, however, remains a mystery.
Very misleading BBC headline, as I said before the Church was never going to endorse full gay marriage as doctrine.
If you actually read the article it says prayers will be able to be said for gay marriages and same sex clergy will be able to not be celibate for the first time, which is close to the fudge I predicted.
Though it looks like liberals are still going to try and force a vote on it at Synod next month anyway whatever the Bishops propose
I think you made a typo. You said "liberals" when I think you meant to type "those who are not bigoted homophobes".
By which I assume you mean the evangelicals? I don't agree with the evangelicals on this but they are entitled to their view
The spin is that this is a substantial move, though it will be interesting to see how well the line that the Church will bless SSM as long as it hasn't done them itself will stick.
Maybe this is the price of not wanting another class of flying bishops.
It will come in time, women Bishops didn't get the required majority first time round but did shortly after.
Plus allowing prayers for homosexual couples and non celibate homosexual priests is a step forward
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
Er, with all due respect, how the fuck do you know? We’ve never met
I ENJOY drinking. Indeed I love it. I love the buzz of that first cracking gin and tonic. I love the discovery of a new red from some mad place. I love the mouthfeel of an excellent margarita, the salt on the lips, crunchy, and intoxicating. MMMMMM. I love a picnic in sunny English countryside knowing there’s an chilled bottle of Nyetimber or Meursault waiting to go with the cheese and strawberries and jamon iberica de bellota
It also makes meals much more enjoyable, it makes socialising smoother and happier, it gives the day a delicious structure. You work hard, you go the gym, you meet and you greet, and then there is your reward. BOOZE
God would not have made wine so enjoyable if he did not want us to get rat faced
The trick, I found, in my younger days was what my friends and I called "Maintaining an even strain".
That is, not getting hammered. Maintaining that buzz from the first drink without sinking into the floor.
Any fool can drink until the hospital bed beckons.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
The only point in dry January, lent etc is to prove that that is not true
I am off to Kenya for 2 weeks with people who make Australians look teetotal, planning dry February when I get back. At least it's not a leap year.
I did a couple of dry weeks some time ago - as an experiment - and my main conclusion was Fuck, this is boring
I DID sleep a little better, that is true. I didn’t feel any sharper in the mornings. There was more time to spare, I guess. But socialising felt worse
If I’d carried on I might have gone back to heroin out of tedium
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
The test apparently is not whether Jack is “right” but whether his concerns are “reasonable”. So ScotGov has to prove they are unreasonable. Given all the advice they were given, but ignored, about interaction with the Equality Act before they passed the bill that may not be a hill they wish to die on.
Timely reminder. Now 18 months since Supreme Court ruled UN Convention on Rights of Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill was unlawful because exceeded devolved powers. FM said it left her unable to fully protect children’s rights She is still to bring back an amended bill. 1/2
The Q of which government is making a “full frontal assault” on devolution over the GRR bill will similarly be resolved in court with onus potentially placed on SG to bring back an amended bill which satisfies GRA reform and legal competence. 2/2
The S35 order is gift week for the SNP. It doesn't matter about the GRR bill, its now an assault on Westminster Tories on Holyrood to impose a Tory veto on anything they do. That stalwart of Scottish independence Lord Falconer tears the Tory argument apart in a detailed thread: https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615400867015819278
What it means for Scotland isn't good.
When over 60% of Scots oppose Sturgeon's Bill that is not good for the SNP
The bill was widely attacked and not always factually. It may well have caused trouble for the cross-party MSPs who voted for it. But it appears to be dead now and replaced by a new issue. Do MSPs have the right to vote through bills on devolved matters without that whining shit Ross going down to Westminster and getting it vetoed?
His contribution to yesterday's Westminster debate was telling. All about why the bill was wrong, not about why there is constitutional risk in rUK. All about how he couldn't even whip the Tory MSPs into opposition, had to give them a free vote, and was outvoted.
A Westminster Tory veto of Holyrood is the issue now, not the popularity or whys and wherefores of a dead bill.
Given only 55% of Scots voted No to independence in 2014 even before Brexit but over 60% of Scots oppose Sturgeon's Bill, this might even boost Unionists as Westminster standing up for Scots v Sturgeon's government
Plus look at our society. Try to buy a Birthday/Anniversary/Congratulations on your New Job/Happy 10th Birthday card and 85% of them use some droll alcohol/gin reference.
We get plastered, blotto, sloshed, etc. All vaguely heroic-sounding states.
Go to LHR or any airport at 8.30am and the bars are chock full with people drinking.
Then go to A&E on a Friday or Saturday night and see what this causes.
As I, ahem, may have mentioned I used to do doorwork in Central London on Fridays and Saturdays and although Friday was marginally better (people simply not having had enough time to get fuelled up), Saturdays were often carnage.
The UK does have a fantastically ugly relationship with alcohol. Only Russia comes close in my experience.
Since my early 20s I've only ever had one tot of pusser's on Taranto Night and that's it for the year but I jacked that in about 5 years when we ran out and I couldn't be arsed to get another bottle. What I've noticed is that other people can be quite fantastically discommoded if you refuse to drink,
I think it's changed in recent decades and like all things it's quite class dependent. Middle class Gen X heavy drinking is more like the French heavy drinking of a few decades ago when their average consumption was about a bottle of wine a day, rather than Russian vodka downing.
I think there are many other cultures with as or more problematic drinking cultures: most of Eastern Europe, much of Scandinavia, large tracts of central and Southern Africa, pretty much any contacted indigenous society.
I'm doing dry January. Its the longest I have gone without a drink in as long as I can remember. Doing it because I need to lose weight rather than because I was concerned at my alcohol intake.
Am ensuring that I will restart at some point next month by stocking up on some beer and some new whisky...
Chopper mishap overwhelmingly likely to be a malfunction I think, passé Bryant and Srivaddhanaprabha. I'm guessing helicopters are among the riskier transport methods.
Planes are built to be able to glide if there is a total engine failure, so pilots have time to make plan and try to land somewhere in an emergency. If just one engine fails the plane can continue as normal. A decision to make an unscheduled landing would be made on safety or fuel considerations. Most plane crashes are results of problems during take off or landing, when there is much less opportunity to react to the problem successfully.
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
The key issue with a chopper is the gear box rather than the engine. If there is an engine failure helicopters have the ability to autorotate - disconnecting the engine using the air flow through the rotors to provide lift. It is dangerous but in an emergency it can work. Most of the fatal accidents in the North Sea have been due to gear box failures.
I always liked the fact that helicopters have a chip detector in the gearbox oil - that is, they measure how much has been ground off the gearbox gears and light up a warning light if it gets above a certain level....
"This machine is eating itself. That's fine, we are measuring the rate at which it is eating itself, and we even have a little warning light for that."
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
I agree. I've read the UKG submission and it's flimsy imo. Unless you dispense with the concept of materiality I can't see how it stands.
I'm not predicting how any ruling will go. I'm just pointing out that this sets a very low bar for the use of what is a constitutional sledgehammer.
The Scottish legislation may well be a mistake, but devolution, if we're serious about it, means letting the Scottish parliament make its own mistakes. If we're not, that will also have consequences.
"If you must drink at all, two drinks maximum each week is deemed low-risk by the government-backed guidance."
I drink, on average, a bottle of red wine every day and a smattering of gin and tonics. Sometimes more, rarely less. The odd dry day here and there
And I have had a a fucking HOOT for forty adult years
No doubt you're exaggerating like "hellraisers" always do. If a "hellraiser" says he's on a bottle of vodka a day the truth will be about a third of that.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
I’m probably understating,TBH
But I feel fine at this level of intake. I am rarely ill. I also exercise a LOT, I do not smoke, and I eat very healthily. I walk and swim and go to the gym. I cut out all the other drugs 20 years ago
My Dad is a big drinker and he is still (just about) with us age 87 (and still drinking)
I wonder if I am just lucky (inshallah, touch wood, please don’t hit me God) and maybe blessed with a fairly robust constitution. I would not recommend my level of intake to anyone as a GOOD thing. You need to know yourself
Well if it's your only bad (health) habit and the family has 'long life' form that's obviously lower risk than otherwise. But don't kid yourself. Or DO kid yourself rather - you have to in life - but don't believe any of it.
As the old saw goes, “tee totallers don’t live longer, it just feels longer….”
Said by smug drinkers, trying to make out that their pissed existence is so much more fulfilling.
A huge amount of drinking gets started by social peer pressure to conform. I've had it all my life. Especially strong in a law firm I worked at, where at least 5 of the partners were functioning alcoholics.
Are you teetotal?!
Yes. Lifelong. But only because I can't stand the taste or the smell. I just have a physical reaction, even at low levels. Which is probably fortunate, because if I threw myself at booze the way I do with other things in life, my liver would have been in trouble decades back.
The reaction is probably weird genetics. My father couldn't stand to be in the same room as cheese...
Just had the best part of three months in hospital, so no alcohol. Come home to at least a glass of wine every night, which, apart from colouring my urine bag, seems to have had little effect.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
I agree. I've read the UKG submission and it's flimsy imo. Unless you dispense with the concept of materiality I can't see how it stands.
I'm not predicting how any ruling will go. I'm just pointing out that this sets a very low bar for the use of what is a constitutional sledgehammer.
The Scottish legislation may well be a mistake, but devolution, if we're serious about it, means letting the Scottish parliament make its own mistakes. If we're not, that will also have consequences.
Quite, not least because ignoring devolution means the Westminster parliament imposing its mistakes on Scotland. For instance, not doing anything to abolish feudal law. It took the reconvened Scottish Parliament to sort that out pretty quickly (and that was when it was firmly Unionist in composition).
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
Er, with all due respect, how the fuck do you know? We’ve never met
I ENJOY drinking. Indeed I love it. I love the buzz of that first cracking gin and tonic. I love the discovery of a new red from some mad place. I love the mouthfeel of an excellent margarita, the salt on the lips, crunchy, and intoxicating. MMMMMM. I love a picnic in sunny English countryside knowing there’s an chilled bottle of Nyetimber or Meursault waiting to go with the cheese and strawberries and jamon iberica de bellota
It also makes meals much more enjoyable, it makes socialising smoother and happier, it gives the day a delicious structure. You work hard, you go the gym, you meet and you greet, and then there is your reward. BOOZE
God would not have made wine so enjoyable if he did not want us to get rat faced
The trick, I found, in my younger days was what my friends and I called "Maintaining an even strain".
That is, not getting hammered. Maintaining that buzz from the first drink without sinking into the floor.
Any fool can drink until the hospital bed beckons.
I agree. I never get “bad drunk”. I never get shouty, or aggressive, or weepy. I never puke. I never fall over. Or drive into walls. The most that happens - and this is once every few years - is I will get so hammered I wake up with a bit of memory loss (what did I do??). But that is vanishingly rare and even then I don’t behave badly, I just act the fool - usually alongside people equally foolish, which is fun
i hate bad drunks. The spiteful and the violent. Ugh. If that happens to me I will quit. Unlikely now, tho
Just had the best part of three months in hospital, so no alcohol. Come home to at least a glass of wine every night, which, apart from colouring my urine bag, seems to have had little effect.
I noticed that my mother (who at 92 I believe has some years on you) has quietly switched from a daily glass of wine to a daily glass of port. And it seems to have done her no harm and a significant amount of good in terms of her daily life, although we don't have the counterfactual had she been teetotal.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
For your 30 cases do you buy it (mixed, presumably) case by case or bottle by bottle. Or is your spare room filled to the ceiling with cases from Octavian? The logistics of buying a case of wine every 10 days or so are surely formidable.
I buy from supermarkets a lot - you can get really interesting bottles from Waitrose, Tesco, M&S - if you go online
I also buy mixed boxes (of 6 or 12 or 18) from Vivino
I get it delivered - when in London - about once a week. It’s not a logistical nightmare! It just turns up at your door
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
I agree. I've read the UKG submission and it's flimsy imo. Unless you dispense with the concept of materiality I can't see how it stands.
I'm not predicting how any ruling will go. I'm just pointing out that this sets a very low bar for the use of what is a constitutional sledgehammer.
The Scottish legislation may well be a mistake, but devolution, if we're serious about it, means letting the Scottish parliament make its own mistakes. If we're not, that will also have consequences.
The question is whether this is a "mistake" that is confined in its effect entirely to Scotland. Lawyers looking at the matter advising the UK government say it has impact outside Scotland.
Haven't seen a convincing retort on this point from Scottish lawyers/devolutionists.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
For your 30 cases do you buy it (mixed, presumably) case by case or bottle by bottle. Or is your spare room filled to the ceiling with cases from Octavian? The logistics of buying a case of wine every 10 days or so are surely formidable.
I buy from supermarkets a lot - you can get really interesting bottles from Waitrose, Tesco, M&S - if you go online
I also buy mixed boxes (of 6 or 12 or 18) from Vivino
I get it delivered - when in London - about once a week. It’s not a logistical nightmare! It just turns up at your door
Sounds good. If for me a bit of a hassle having to spend so much time choosing wine and having it delivered.
No snark, but having to choose this case or that (assuming you don't just go for their "box of the week") every week, always, and then having it delivered or left on your doorstep, week in week out seems a hassle.
Edit: I love supermarkets; I really regret Tesco closing their wine dept and Aldi now has virtually nothing online.
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
I agree. I've read the UKG submission and it's flimsy imo. Unless you dispense with the concept of materiality I can't see how it stands.
I'm not predicting how any ruling will go. I'm just pointing out that this sets a very low bar for the use of what is a constitutional sledgehammer.
The Scottish legislation may well be a mistake, but devolution, if we're serious about it, means letting the Scottish parliament make its own mistakes. If we're not, that will also have consequences.
The question is whether this is a "mistake" that is confined in its effect entirely to Scotland. Lawyers looking at the matter advising the UK government say it has impact outside Scotland.
Haven't seen a convincing retort on this point from Scottish lawyers/devolutionists.
How then does UKG cope with people from juridsitctions which have similar legal situations in, notably, Ireland? Not to mention other countries?
Differences in status is nothing new. The English elite used to get very nasty about Scottish heterosexual marriages and tried to disregard them as legally invalid at one time. Even today, the legal basis of marriage in Scotland is different.
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
Er, with all due respect, how the fuck do you know? We’ve never met
I ENJOY drinking. Indeed I love it. I love the buzz of that first cracking gin and tonic. I love the discovery of a new red from some mad place. I love the mouthfeel of an excellent margarita, the salt on the lips, crunchy, and intoxicating. MMMMMM. I love a picnic in sunny English countryside knowing there’s an chilled bottle of Nyetimber or Meursault waiting to go with the cheese and strawberries and jamon iberica de bellota
It also makes meals much more enjoyable, it makes socialising smoother and happier, it gives the day a delicious structure. You work hard, you go the gym, you meet and you greet, and then there is your reward. BOOZE
God would not have made wine so enjoyable if he did not want us to get rat faced
The trick, I found, in my younger days was what my friends and I called "Maintaining an even strain".
That is, not getting hammered. Maintaining that buzz from the first drink without sinking into the floor.
Any fool can drink until the hospital bed beckons.
I agree. I never get “bad drunk”. I never get shouty, or aggressive, or weepy. I never puke. I never fall over. Or drive into walls. The most that happens - and this is once every few years - is I will get so hammered I wake up with a bit of memory loss (what did I do??). But that is vanishingly rare and even then I don’t behave badly, I just act the fool - usually alongside people equally foolish, which is fun
i hate bad drunks. The spiteful and the violent. Ugh. If that happens to me I will quit. Unlikely now, tho
FWIW Whether the s35 Order is justified depends on reasons advanced by HMG for saying GRR has adverse effect on UK equality law. For the reasons I have tweeted those reasons do not begin to justify its use. It’s a nuclear weapon used in a minor skirmish. https://twitter.com/LordCFalconer/status/1615424816680472594
I agree. I've read the UKG submission and it's flimsy imo. Unless you dispense with the concept of materiality I can't see how it stands.
The Scottish legislation may well be a mistake, but devolution, if we're serious about it, means letting the Scottish parliament make its own mistakes. If we're not, that will also have consequences.
They’re allowed to make their own mistakes (see for example the Hate Speech Act, which doesn’t look like it’s going to be enforced for at least another two years). The issue comes when their mistakes impinge on the rights of the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, which they have no right to do.
Comments
Was a big blow at the time psychologically if not operationally and perhaps operationally as well.
Tbh being in lovely, warm, interesting, beautiful environs full of female pulchritudinousness (if that's a word) doesn't appear to reduce your intake.
But on the offchance you're not, I'd ease off a bit.
The only point I will make here is that the test for the second limb of s35 is reasonable belief there will be adverse effects. Not proportionality. Not balancing of interests. Wednesbury unreasonableness. Has the SoS lost his mind to conclude adverse effects? If no, s35 stands.
Falconer’s thread is a very good example for law students of trying to argue the merits of an administrative decision rather than the legality.
https://twitter.com/michaelpforan/status/1615497174795575296
EDIT - that reply you posted from someone pointing out that its about the SoS having "reasonable belief" there is a problem. We're going to see that tested are we not?
This just seems like quite tyrannical and puritanical guidelines, just written from an extremely risk averse perspective. if you follow it through to its conclusion you would also try and stop things like horse riding, skiing, motorcycling etc. Probably even cycling on the roads. Boxing? Contact sports? All of this involves 'risk' but that has to be balanced against something like 'personal fulfillment'.
You would expect popular governments to crush this type of thing, but sadly it feels like people are becoming more risk averse, retreating in to virtual lives and away from the idea of freedom.
Shambles.
Recommends up to 2 bottles of wine a day.
What’s the point in two drinks? You might get mildly tipsy for 3 minutes and then the rest of the week you’re still in fucking Winnipeg. Stone cold sober. In the permafrost
So people will continue to drink but without any guidance whatsoever, because the only guidance they have is laughably absurd
Docs should start levellling with people.
“Drinking is fine in moderation. The benefits - socialisation, mental anaesthesia, laughing a lot - probably outweigh any disbenefits for the vast majority of people. Moderation is half a bottle of wine a day for women, maybe 3/4 a bottle for men. Have dry days tho. Every week. Two in a row if poss. Also, some people can get away with drinking a lot more, but you might not be one of them, so be really careful, and some people sadly can’t drink much at all, so make sure you’re not one of them either
If you ever vomit from booze, or lose memory of evenings, or black out, you are definitely drinking too much. Go see a doc”
There, that’s my advice, and it’s better than the shite from these twats in Toronto
If something major happens to the engine or rotors of a helicopter the craft drops directly to the ground. Even if the pilot has a chance to get the helicopter under control , he has little time for decision making as helicopters fly at low altitudes.
about with, when it was actually quite nice.
Unless you’re hoping for deflation, which as far as I understand it is bad news.
So you should be seeing negative monthly figures now, but you're not. Suggests there is a problem, and that waiting for the past large increases to fall out of the figures won't help you as much as you hope.
New timetable came in over a month ago. And its still chaos. Because drivers and guards 1sign too small a section of the route these services operate on. One of them missing for one of the multiple crew changes? Cancel it - and a chunk of the rest of the diagram.
They tried to "fix" Scarborough by reducing it to a shuttle to York. And you still get 3 hour gaps. They are hopeless, but "just renationalise them" won't help. The private sector consortium which is DOLR (the "nationalised" operator) has no spare capacity to take on another operator. And is banned by the DfT from getting more people to do so. And even if that happened it would still take many many months to get a new management team in place, reach an agreement with train crew over rostering and then fix the damage by retraining everyone on wider route cards.
IIRC it is moderate drinkers who live longest….
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
I don't do it these days, but for many years I would happily drink a bottle of red with dinner then pop to the pub to see mates for two or three beers to gently maintain the buzz.
But I feel fine at this level of intake. I am rarely ill. I also exercise a LOT, I do not smoke, and I eat very healthily. I walk and swim and go to the gym. I cut out all the other drugs 20 years ago
My Dad is a big drinker and he is still (just about) with us age 87 (and still drinking)
I wonder if I am just lucky (inshallah, touch wood, please don’t hit me God) and maybe blessed with a fairly robust constitution. I would not recommend my level of intake to anyone as a GOOD thing. You need to know yourself
Again, I don't really care about preserving the GRR bill. I do care about basic democracy where we have a devolved parliament being overruled by Westminster when the government thinks it will play well in its culture war against whatever they think woke is this week.
Well, I guess THAT didn’t go the way he wanted 😈😂
https://twitter.com/Gillian_Philip/status/1615448704617439245
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23256763.gender-recognition-reform-polls-people-say/
Edit: Nats all co-ordinating “since 2016” and “six years”, as if this wasn’t something they passed only a fortnight ago.
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
For planes and rail we're talking orders of magnitude safer than cars.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
The classic in the City is people living on coffee all day. Then a "tightener" or 2 every evening to sleep. Both escalate until the doctor calls a halt, usually after a medical scare.
You can easily spot those - they are always drinking vast amounts of water on doctors advice and not touching the coffee. Plus looking 1 million percent happier and healthier.
A positive for heavy drinkers for the report is that it shows each drink more or less moves you up or down the spectrum of risk - contrary to some earlier public guidance that suggest less than x is safe, more than x risky.
His contribution to yesterday's Westminster debate was telling. All about why the bill was wrong, not about why there is constitutional risk in rUK. All about how he couldn't even whip the Tory MSPs into opposition, had to give them a free vote, and was outvoted.
A Westminster Tory veto of Holyrood is the issue now, not the popularity or whys and wherefores of a dead bill.
Life expectancy in three of the biggest drinking nations on earth (all in the top ten by alcohol per capita):
Spain: 82.33
Ireland: 82.2 years
Germany: 80.94
And now three equally prosperous teetotal countries:
Qatar: 79.1
UAE; 78.95
Saudi: 76.2
it’s all a total load of hairy bollocks. Go out and have a gin. Three gins
In the US forces if you pull off an autorotate and live to tell about it you get the 'Broken Wing' award.
BorisWinston.Albeit he was talking about champagne presumably as a sharpener before his proper drinking began.
We get plastered, blotto, sloshed, etc. All vaguely heroic-sounding states.
Go to LHR or any airport at 8.30am and the bars are chock full with people drinking.
Then go to A&E on a Friday or Saturday night and see what this causes.
As I, ahem, may have mentioned I used to do doorwork in Central London on Fridays and Saturdays and although Friday was marginally better (people simply not having had enough time to get fuelled up), Saturdays were often carnage.
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
It is remarkable to think that our greatest prime minister got the nation through its greatest crisis, and achieved perhaps its greatest triumph, while being completely shitfaced 85% of the waking day
Helicopters are a freak of nature, and there’s way too many unavoidable single points of failure in most of them.
It is however true, that the NS helos are safer than the drive to the airport.
A huge amount of drinking gets started by social peer pressure to conform. I've had it all my life. Especially strong in a law firm I worked at, where at least 5 of the partners were functioning alcoholics.
https://www.churchofengland.org/media-and-news/press-releases/bishops-propose-prayers-thanksgiving-dedication-and-gods-blessing
The spin is that this is a substantial move, though it will be interesting to see how well the line that the Church will bless SSM as long as it hasn't done them itself will stick.
Maybe this is the price of not wanting another class of flying bishops.
I am off to Kenya for 2 weeks with people who make Australians look teetotal, planning dry February when I get back. At least it's not a leap year.
I ENJOY drinking. Indeed I love it. I love the buzz of that first cracking gin and tonic. I love the discovery of a new red from some mad place. I love the mouthfeel of an excellent margarita, the salt on the lips, crunchy, and intoxicating. MMMMMM. I love a picnic in sunny English countryside knowing there’s a chilled bottle of Nyetimber or Meursault waiting to go with the cheese and strawberries and jamon iberica de bellota
It also makes meals much more enjoyable, it makes socialising smoother and happier, it gives the day a delicious structure. You work hard, you go the gym, you meet and you greet, and then there is your reward. BOOZE
God would not have made wine so enjoyable if he did not want us to get rat faced
Using helos as a taxi on land brings a very different set of risks to North Sea flights on regular ferry routes.
I am happy to seize on reports like this one in the Times. It does seem there is probably a tipping point, between relatively healthy and happy on quite a lot of alcohol, and heading towards an early grave from cancer or cirrhosis on a tiny bit more. I just wish doctors were able to specify exactly where.
I agree that the tiny limits some medics come up with don't help. They're like the safety advice for avoiding skin cancer on sunny days: wear a long sleeved shirt, a wide brimmed hat and factor 50 sunblock at all times, and even then make sure you always sit in the shade. Ideally indoors. Then wonder why your knee joints started going a bit wobbly.
Since my early 20s I've only ever had one tot of pusser's on Taranto Night and that's it for the year but I jacked that in about 5 years when we ran out and I couldn't be arsed to get another bottle. What I've noticed is that other people can be quite fantastically discommoded if you refuse to drink,
Plus allowing prayers for homosexual couples and non celibate homosexual priests is a step forward
That is, not getting hammered. Maintaining that buzz from the first drink without sinking into the floor.
Any fool can drink until the hospital bed beckons.
I DID sleep a little better, that is true. I didn’t feel any sharper in the mornings. There was more time to spare, I guess. But socialising felt worse
If I’d carried on I might have gone back to heroin out of tedium
I think there are many other cultures with as or more problematic drinking cultures: most of Eastern Europe, much of Scandinavia, large tracts of central and Southern Africa, pretty much any contacted indigenous society.
Am ensuring that I will restart at some point next month by stocking up on some beer and some new whisky...
"This machine is eating itself. That's fine, we are measuring the rate at which it is eating itself, and we even have a little warning light for that."
I'm just pointing out that this sets a very low bar for the use of what is a constitutional sledgehammer.
The Scottish legislation may well be a mistake, but devolution, if we're serious about it, means letting the Scottish parliament make its own mistakes. If we're not, that will also have consequences.
The reaction is probably weird genetics. My father couldn't stand to be in the same room as cheese...
i hate bad drunks. The spiteful and the violent. Ugh. If that happens to me I will quit. Unlikely now, tho
I also buy mixed boxes (of 6 or 12 or 18) from Vivino
I get it delivered - when in London - about once a week. It’s not a logistical nightmare! It just turns up at your door
Haven't seen a convincing retort on this point from Scottish lawyers/devolutionists.
No snark, but having to choose this case or that (assuming you don't just go for their "box of the week") every week, always, and then having it delivered or left on your doorstep, week in week out seems a hassle.
Edit: I love supermarkets; I really regret Tesco closing their wine dept and Aldi now has virtually nothing online.
Differences in status is nothing new. The English elite used to get very nasty about Scottish heterosexual marriages and tried to disregard them as legally invalid at one time. Even today, the legal basis of marriage in Scotland is different.
Is the one resolution I have never broken.
Obviously double nothing is nothing.
I don’t need alcohol to have a good time.