Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
The BMA voted to restrict the numbers of Doctors trained, but I am unsure of the mechanism by which they exercise that authority - threat of strike action if training places increase? If it's the DOH, questions need to be asked in parliament and the Minister needs to intervene to reverse both this decision in particular, and the policy more generally. In fact, that's true regardless of which particular bunch of civil service scrotes is doing this.
Back channels combined with a synchronicity of interests.
When people want to really change things in this country, you need to understand why it hasn’t happened already.
Think back - the massive expansion of uni education under Major, Blair…. Seems obvious to train more doctors and nurses? Why didn’t they?
That's far too oblique for me on a Saturday I'm afraid - I need it spelled out.
Is the BMA the official qualification body? I suppose they could literally refuse to register any more. Twats.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
They're doing the same in teaching, except there they're actually cutting numbers due to a series of administrative errors.
And removing the local outstanding teaching college that twin b would otherwise be at in September 2024.
Chances are she won’t be looking at teaching as a career because it will now be a faff that wouldn’t have been the case - her career would have been training and then into one of the schools within the trust as an English / RE / music teacher.
Would that be Durham, presumably?
One of the more bizarre features of this process was that the DfE publicly declared they were going to ignore Ofsted's ratings in such cases because 'they only see tiny snapshots in two-day inspections.'
I mean - did they actually mean to say OFSTED inspections are worthless, or did somebody just not engage their brain?
Also they had no proper appeals process and seemed blithely unconcerned at an existing 40% shortfall in numbers.
It's really quite hard to understand how anyone could make decisions this incompetent by accident.
Not Durham - Carmel Teaching Training Partnership - which covered South County Durham and Teesside.
I think the issue is that some was allowed to let their personal preferences get through...
I don't wish to alarm PBers, but I'm editing PB on Friday through to the Monday.
Hmm.... all day mediation on Monday. To prepare or have a lazy weekend for a change? Difficult.
Just to clarify my stint begins Friday the 3rd of February.
Damn. Will have to pretend to be interested after all.
The more I deal with High Court crime the more I am inclined to tell some of my civil clients to grow up. Discussions suggest that this is quite a common view amongst those who have done prosecution work.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
The rationing of trained doctors is absolutely deliberate and has been as far as I know a long running policy.
The idea is that with fewer doctors the NHS will not be able to do as much expensive healthcare. It’s essentially a form of rationing, with an ancillary hope that doing so will drive efficiency (do more with less) too.
A completely idiotic policy even without a 7m waiting list of patients, utterly insane when we have.
If you're able to disclose the university and the trust (I think that would still protect your relatives?) this should be raised with MPs.
It is a fairly common phenomenon that the DoH restricts postgraduate training places too. My Trust is losing some surgical trainee places shortly to other regions, despite the East Midlands having fewer doctors per capita and longer waiting lists.
I could honestly do better planning on a beermat after 5 pints.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
They're doing the same in teaching, except there they're actually cutting numbers due to a series of administrative errors.
And removing the local outstanding teaching college that twin b would otherwise be at in September 2024.
Chances are she won’t be looking at teaching as a career because it will now be a faff that wouldn’t have been the case - her career would have been training and then into one of the schools within the trust as an English / RE / music teacher.
Would that be Durham, presumably?
One of the more bizarre features of this process was that the DfE publicly declared they were going to ignore Ofsted's ratings in such cases because 'they only see tiny snapshots in two-day inspections.'
I mean - did they actually mean to say OFSTED inspections are worthless, or did somebody just not engage their brain?
Also they had no proper appeals process and seemed blithely unconcerned at an existing 40% shortfall in numbers.
It's really quite hard to understand how anyone could make decisions this incompetent by accident.
Not Durham - Carmel Teaching Training Partnership - which covered South County Durham and Teesside.
So they actually zapped two in the same area, an area already struggling with chronic teacher shortages?
I don't wish to alarm PBers, but I'm editing PB on Friday through to the Monday.
Hmm.... all day mediation on Monday. To prepare or have a lazy weekend for a change? Difficult.
Just to clarify my stint begins Friday the 3rd of February.
Damn. Will have to pretend to be interested after all.
The more I deal with High Court crime the more I am inclined to tell some of civil clients to grow up. Discussions suggest that this is quite a common view amongst those who have done prosecution work.
I am intrigued. What crimes have the High Court been committing?
I don't wish to alarm PBers, but I'm editing PB on Friday through to the Monday.
Hmm.... all day mediation on Monday. To prepare or have a lazy weekend for a change? Difficult.
Just to clarify my stint begins Friday the 3rd of February.
I'm more concerned about Feb 6th when in theory OGH needs to be out of hospital or will be witnesses the full impact of a nursing strike while on a hospital ward
I don't wish to alarm PBers, but I'm editing PB on Friday through to the Monday.
Hmm.... all day mediation on Monday. To prepare or have a lazy weekend for a change? Difficult.
Just to clarify my stint begins Friday the 3rd of February.
Damn. Will have to pretend to be interested after all.
The more I deal with High Court crime the more I am inclined to tell some of civil clients to grow up. Discussions suggest that this is quite a common view amongst those who have done prosecution work.
I am intrigued. What crimes have the High Court been committing?
I don't wish to alarm PBers, but I'm editing PB on Friday through to the Monday.
Hmm.... all day mediation on Monday. To prepare or have a lazy weekend for a change? Difficult.
Just to clarify my stint begins Friday the 3rd of February.
I'm more concerned about Feb 6th when in theory OGH needs to be out of hospital or will be witnesses the full impact of a nursing strike while on a hospital ward
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
The BMA voted to restrict the numbers of Doctors trained, but I am unsure of the mechanism by which they exercise that authority - threat of strike action if training places increase? If it's the DOH, questions need to be asked in parliament and the Minister needs to intervene to reverse both this decision in particular, and the policy more generally. In fact, that's true regardless of which particular bunch of civil service scrotes is doing this.
Back channels combined with a synchronicity of interests.
When people want to really change things in this country, you need to understand why it hasn’t happened already.
Think back - the massive expansion of uni education under Major, Blair…. Seems obvious to train more doctors and nurses? Why didn’t they?
That's far too oblique for me on a Saturday I'm afraid - I need it spelled out.
Is the BMA the official qualification body? I suppose they could literally refuse to register any more. Twats.
It’s not any one group.
BMA likes scarcity for doctors Importing medical staff saved on training costs Medical training is expensive - history degrees are cheap. Rationing by scarcity of resources is how demand is controlled in the NHS - since 1945
What happens is that a group of interests hardens into a systemic policy. It Is How Things Are Done.
Thatcher was widely hated in the civil service for her ability to break such department policies. The invective in internal memos about her obsession with CFCs and then C02 emissions are quite instructive.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
The BMA voted to restrict the numbers of Doctors trained, but I am unsure of the mechanism by which they exercise that authority - threat of strike action if training places increase? If it's the DOH, questions need to be asked in parliament and the Minister needs to intervene to reverse both this decision in particular, and the policy more generally. In fact, that's true regardless of which particular bunch of civil service scrotes is doing this.
Back channels combined with a synchronicity of interests.
When people want to really change things in this country, you need to understand why it hasn’t happened already.
Think back - the massive expansion of uni education under Major, Blair…. Seems obvious to train more doctors and nurses? Why didn’t they?
Because the "massive expansion of uni education" was of vanity degrees that would be forgotten after the interviews for the students' first jobs?
And because doctors and nurses need a more tangible kind of education - and aptitude?
That article about having books in the house being smug and middle class attracted a lot of comment and derision. But it comes from a long line of "Love something? This is why it is bad" school of journalism. Thread:
The Guardian took a definite turn towards more and more of this stuff under its current editor. It’s pretty much unreadable these days, apart from the odd columnist.
Rhiannon Lucy Coslett, the author of the first article bemoaning the middle classness of owning books (despite her name being incredibly middle class), once wrote an article about the horrors of 'spidermanning' sweeping University campuses. Without being crass, she described a form of sexual assault where a male and female would be having consensual sex, while unbeknownst to the young woman, his friends would be masturbating on the other side of the door. Upon ejaculation, the group of young men would burst into the room and throw sperm on the young woman.
I remember this article, since I was at University, and it struck me as wildly impractical. The logistics alone would put the Dolittle raid to shame. I don't doubt it happened to someone, somewhere, but it made me think that Ms Coslett was rather naive to suggest it as a widespread practice and that she was taken in. On the other hand, it may have been that she had a deadline to meet and a lack of material with which to meet it.
Rhiannon Lucy Coslett may sound middle-class to the English.
But, she is a Welsh speaker from Gwynedd. And her life has not been easy.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
The BMA voted to restrict the numbers of Doctors trained, but I am unsure of the mechanism by which they exercise that authority - threat of strike action if training places increase? If it's the DOH, questions need to be asked in parliament and the Minister needs to intervene to reverse both this decision in particular, and the policy more generally. In fact, that's true regardless of which particular bunch of civil service scrotes is doing this.
Back channels combined with a synchronicity of interests.
When people want to really change things in this country, you need to understand why it hasn’t happened already.
Think back - the massive expansion of uni education under Major, Blair…. Seems obvious to train more doctors and nurses? Why didn’t they?
Because the "massive expansion of uni education" was of vanity degrees that would be forgotten after the interviews for the students' first jobs?
And because doctors and nurses need a more tangible kind of education - and aptitude?
Cost was one part. But a massive expansion in medical education and training meant taking on a bunch of special interests and settled policies.
During COVID, due to the exam fuckup, some uni courses expanded 25% - there is, apparently no evidence of a quality problem. The state education system fails millions who could have gone into better things.
I’ve been through both private and state education, as have my daughters. Private simply makes better use of those who are willing to learn - they have the resources and the independence to do that.
More woodland, less City, I say. Or at least more woodland for all.
This might be of interest for HYUFD, from the comments below the article :
"This mirrors what happened with the Epping Forest. In the late 19th Century it was Victorian era people power that saved this last substantial part of the woods that once covered most of Southern England. It was part of the larger Waltham Forest and would once have joined up with Hanault Forest and this leftover fragment of Gorne Wood.
Ordinary people demonstrated for it's saviour until the richest public authority of the time; The City of London Corporation; agreed to buy it and police it under an act of Parliament in 1878, which they have done incredibly well ever since.
Adjacent householders and farmers to the forest have their territories marked and if anyone moves a fence by half a metre into the Forest, they receive an enforcement order to move it."
More woodland, less City, I say. Or at least more woodland for all.
This might be of interest for HYUFD, from the comments below the article :
"This mirrors what happened with the Epping Forest. In the late 19th Century it was Victorian era people power that saved this last substantial part of the woods that once covered most of Southern England. It was part of the larger Waltham Forest and would once have joined up with Hanault Forest and this leftover fragment of Gorne Wood.
Ordinary people demonstrated for it's saviour until the richest public authority of the time; The City of London Corporation; agreed to buy it and police it under an act of Parliament in 1878, which they have done incredibly well ever since.
Adjacent householders and farmers to the forest have their territories marked and if anyone moves a fence by half a metre into the Forest, they receive an enforcement order to move it."
Yes, the Corporation of London manage Epping Forest even in Essex and generally they and the Forest Keepers do a reasonable job
@CorrectHorseBattery3 - did you see any improvement on your short run? I wondered if you've had any analysis done of your running gait? It might be worth seeing if you can make any minor adjustments to help avoid triggering the shin splints.
The Guardian still has a great core of columnists like Toynbee, Monbiot, Freedland and Behr, but they're all older. The Long Read is also good, but otherwise there's quite a few signs of a decline, and it's in subtlety and nuance.
Every now and then they will rescue things with a professional academic perspective on some topic or other that you won't read in any other paper, but there's definitely more rubbish floating around in there as well than there was.
I have to thank the Guardian for one of their list articles the other day as it made it clear how many amazing songs the Bee Gees made. Quite an incredible number of their own and for other artists. And a really good article about the huge growth of the grey seal population in UK waters.
The Bee Gees wrote three of the best love songs of the 20th century.
I like to describe them as “Manchester meets Miami” music.
No. Just no. Everything bad about 70s music is encapsulated in two words: Bee Gees.
The Wombles, The Dooleys, Racey, Kandidate, Bay City Rollers all epitomise crap secentues music.
More woodland, less City, I say. Or at least more woodland for all.
Well done SE4. Despite being only a ten minute drive from our house I'd never heard of Gorne Wood. More Crofton Park than Brockley really. Glad to hear that it's been saved - I don't like Nimbyism and I know we need more housing, but I think a 400 year old wood is probably worth saving.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Next time take a step up from the local Weatherspoons?
The bar for the BBC to report on domestic news items from other countries as the main story needs to be much higher.
Perhaps they are aiming to capture a US audience but their report on the Tyre Nichols video goes out of its way to avoid making it explicit that they are talking about something happening in a foreign country.
Is there a Memphis in England? Because the report explicitly states the city at the start.
Someone who is ignorant of geography will just see a report about someone being beaten to death by the police.
And......
... it obviously doesn't count if it's a furriner.
That's not the point at all.
We have enough of a problem with importing American social issues without it being encouraged by the way stories are framed by the BBC. Plenty of people just see that "the police" have done something, and it impacts the way the police here are seen. In Multicultural London English, the police are called "the feds".
@CorrectHorseBattery3 - did you see any improvement on your short run? I wondered if you've had any analysis done of your running gait? It might be worth seeing if you can make any minor adjustments to help avoid triggering the shin splints.
No shin pain at all today which is great. I'll do three short runs next week and see how that goes, then re-assess with my physio.
Re gait I've seen a podiatrist already who has given me orthotics, I over-pronate relatively severely.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Next time take a step up from the local Weatherspoons?
Ha ha, please! It was a very nice place in Brockley - not the Brockley Barge (the Spoons in SE4). I guess the waiter was new.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Hey Foxy, hope you are keeping well friend.
Yes, in fine form. Lots more energy this year, I was feeling old but maybe it was a bit of post viral fatigue. Just as well as very long waiting lists to catch up on.
The Guardian still has a great core of columnists like Toynbee, Monbiot, Freedland and Behr, but they're all older. The Long Read is also good, but otherwise there's quite a few signs of a decline, and it's in subtlety and nuance.
Every now and then they will rescue things with a professional academic perspective on some topic or other that you won't read in any other paper, but there's definitely more rubbish floating around in there as well than there was.
I have to thank the Guardian for one of their list articles the other day as it made it clear how many amazing songs the Bee Gees made. Quite an incredible number of their own and for other artists. And a really good article about the huge growth of the grey seal population in UK waters.
The Bee Gees wrote three of the best love songs of the 20th century.
I like to describe them as “Manchester meets Miami” music.
No. Just no. Everything bad about 70s music is encapsulated in two words: Bee Gees.
The Wombles, The Dooleys, Racey, Kandidate, Bay City Rollers all epitomise crap secentues music.
The Bee Gees don’t. They’re fabulous.
We can see how did your love is. You hep cat, they’ll have you jive talkin
Mental health wise, certainly been on the up the last few weeks and in the best spot there I've been for many, many months.
Not being able to run would have certainly knocked me right down a year ago but I am coping and getting by. This is only anecdotal but this is the first winter I've taken Vitamin D daily (have been taking it since late August) and I am sure I've seen an improvement in my mood.
Now I've got through January I'll certainly be coping much better, as I find the spring and summer much easier and indeed these are my favourite months.
I am seeing my therapist now just once a month for support.
Really in a good place, just hope I can get back to running long distance by the summer!
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Role, no - influence on policy, definitely.
Some evidence please.
This is the official BMA position, expansion in numbers at all levels:
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Role, no - influence on policy, definitely.
Some evidence please.
This is the official BMA position, expansion in numbers at all levels:
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Next time take a step up from the local Weatherspoons?
Ha ha, please! It was a very nice place in Brockley - not the Brockley Barge (the Spoons in SE4). I guess the waiter was new.
Wetherspoon's they'd probably have had a wider range of Scotch!
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
Mr Sunak’s personal ratings have slipped to -23, compared to -3 when BMG polled the public in late November. Twenty-four per cent approve of the job he is doing and 47 per cent disapprove. Sir Keir’s net ratings stand at +4.
Worryingly for the Conservatives, they are less trusted than Labour on almost every single issue, including the economy, immigration, healthcare, education, housing and crime. Issues like security, the handling of Covid-19 and the Ukraine war are the only exceptions.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
Mental health wise, certainly been on the up the last few weeks and in the best spot there I've been for many, many months.
Not being able to run would have certainly knocked me right down a year ago but I am coping and getting by. This is only anecdotal but this is the first winter I've taken Vitamin D daily (have been taking it since late August) and I am sure I've seen an improvement in my mood.
Now I've got through January I'll certainly be coping much better, as I find the spring and summer much easier and indeed these are my favourite months.
I am seeing my therapist now just once a month for support.
Really in a good place, just hope I can get back to running long distance by the summer!
Good to hear. I'm also looking forward to the mercury rising. Few more weeks and we're there.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Role, no - influence on policy, definitely.
Some evidence please.
This is the official BMA position, expansion in numbers at all levels:
Mental health wise, certainly been on the up the last few weeks and in the best spot there I've been for many, many months.
Not being able to run would have certainly knocked me right down a year ago but I am coping and getting by. This is only anecdotal but this is the first winter I've taken Vitamin D daily (have been taking it since late August) and I am sure I've seen an improvement in my mood.
Now I've got through January I'll certainly be coping much better, as I find the spring and summer much easier and indeed these are my favourite months.
I am seeing my therapist now just once a month for support.
Really in a good place, just hope I can get back to running long distance by the summer!
Good to hear. I'm also looking forward to the mercury rising. Few more weeks and we're there.
Mental health wise, certainly been on the up the last few weeks and in the best spot there I've been for many, many months.
Not being able to run would have certainly knocked me right down a year ago but I am coping and getting by. This is only anecdotal but this is the first winter I've taken Vitamin D daily (have been taking it since late August) and I am sure I've seen an improvement in my mood.
Now I've got through January I'll certainly be coping much better, as I find the spring and summer much easier and indeed these are my favourite months.
I am seeing my therapist now just once a month for support.
Really in a good place, just hope I can get back to running long distance by the summer!
Good to hear. I'm also looking forward to the mercury rising. Few more weeks and we're there.
Thanks mate, how are you?
In my usual neutral to positive zone. Maybe a teeny bit towards the neutral end.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Next time take a step up from the local Weatherspoons?
Ha ha, please! It was a very nice place in Brockley - not the Brockley Barge (the Spoons in SE4). I guess the waiter was new.
Wetherspoon's they'd probably have had a wider range of Scotch!
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Suella Braverman promised the meeting radical legislation on small boats would reduce crossings
— expect it by end of Feb — it will look at how UK interacts with ECHR — ministers think if it doesn’t work govt could fight next election on leaving ECHR
"Man found living in Austrian cellar with wife and six children born in Britain Police are investigating the illegal underground hideout discovery, which had sparked fears over a repeat of the Josef Fritzl case"
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
Mental health wise, certainly been on the up the last few weeks and in the best spot there I've been for many, many months.
Not being able to run would have certainly knocked me right down a year ago but I am coping and getting by. This is only anecdotal but this is the first winter I've taken Vitamin D daily (have been taking it since late August) and I am sure I've seen an improvement in my mood.
Now I've got through January I'll certainly be coping much better, as I find the spring and summer much easier and indeed these are my favourite months.
I am seeing my therapist now just once a month for support.
Really in a good place, just hope I can get back to running long distance by the summer!
Good to hear. I'm also looking forward to the mercury rising. Few more weeks and we're there.
Thanks mate, how are you?
In my usual neutral to positive zone. Maybe a teeny bit towards the neutral end.
Good to hear. As you know, you are one of my favourite posters
All Starmer has to do is lie low and say nuffin. To be fair, he's basically doing that. There's a growing feeling that 'It's their turn now.'
Short of Corbyn returning, or a major catastrophe being averted by Rishi in a superman costume, this will play to its close.
“All Starmer has to do is lie low and say nuffin.“
Wasn’t that Their idea in 1992 election? So I disagree.
You must always be aggressive in rebuttal, and work on your perceived weaknesses in eyes of voters. They need to turn Starmer into Uncle Starmer - man of the people. It’s easy, just work on his human side, where he grew up, etc. AND They need to get policy idea’s out there. Lots more policy idea’s. If some are nicked by Tories that just hurts the Tories.
"Wasn’t that Their idea in 1992 election? So I disagree."
The fabled triumphlist Festival Of Kinnock Stadium-Sized Campaign Event would suggest that wasn't quite the plan. Even without the impromptu "we're all right"ing.
The fabled triumphlist Festival Of Kinnock Stadium-Sized Campaign Event would suggest they actually were complacent. All around that event of yours they hid unliked mouthy in a potting shed whilst his opponent was in markets on a soap box getting egged as he engaged the voters with idea’s and policy. Labour were sucked in by poll leads and “ours to lose let’s be careful out there” complacency.
Aside from poll leads, what was “best for PM” “best party for economy” saying. If Labour trailed on those they needed to be out their fixing it with gusto. You have to rethink your last post don’t you?
First, that wasn't "my" campaign event in any sense. I voted Tory throughout the 1990s, and thought Labour's 1992 campaign was poor.
However, I think that is the wrong lesson you took from that campaign's failure. It wasn't that Labour were hiding, it was that they thought they could run the campaign through the media alone.
They also thought that Major was a net negative for the Conservatives.
The Tories wisely realised that Major was actually an asset, and that there is no substitute for footslogging.
Blair, on the other hand, *did* learn the lessons of that campaign, marrying footslogging with the media game. And of course he had the huge advantage of polling leads driven by Black Wednesday to work with.
ETA: and of course Labour's poll leads were minuscule-to-negative in the run-up to the 1992 GE, lest we forget that detail.
I don’t think we are far apart on agreement in this discussion, though I need to see more movement from you on a couple of aspects.
“Labour's poll leads were minuscule-to-negative in the run-up to the 1992 GE, lest we forget that detail.” The detail is they were consistent, never behind till the last big poll in last 24 hours, and their lead backed up by council and by elections actual votes right up till election called.
What was Kinnock doing in a potting shed with days to go in a tight campaign other than hiding? If his own team saw him as a weakness they need to tackle that head on, not hide him.
On the polling - from March 11th (the day the GE was announced) to the 8th of April there were 11 polls showing a Tory lead, 2 ties - one of each being in the week running up to polling day.
But I *will* happily clarify in my position on the notion that they feared Kinnock was a liability. They did. And they were right.
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
FFS, as a former gap year waiter, occasionally you get corrected by a guest, especially if you're not trained in what you're serving. It happens, it can be a bit embarrassing, it's fine, and you know next time. Anyone would think OLB had given the little herbert ptsd.
Be sensible and nice, but still correct the error. OLB could have advised that if in doubt, Scotch whisky will always be spelled without the 'e' after the 'k' - thus giving the waiter the advantage of bejng better educated on the topic than 90% of the UK population.
Mental health wise, certainly been on the up the last few weeks and in the best spot there I've been for many, many months.
Not being able to run would have certainly knocked me right down a year ago but I am coping and getting by. This is only anecdotal but this is the first winter I've taken Vitamin D daily (have been taking it since late August) and I am sure I've seen an improvement in my mood.
Now I've got through January I'll certainly be coping much better, as I find the spring and summer much easier and indeed these are my favourite months.
I am seeing my therapist now just once a month for support.
Really in a good place, just hope I can get back to running long distance by the summer!
Good to hear. I'm also looking forward to the mercury rising. Few more weeks and we're there.
Thanks mate, how are you?
In my usual neutral to positive zone. Maybe a teeny bit towards the neutral end.
Good to hear. As you know, you are one of my favourite posters
As Brucie used to say to all the Strictly contestants. 🙂
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
FFS, as a former gap year waiter, occasionally you get corrected by a guest, especially if you're not trained in what you're serving. It happens, it can be a bit embarrassing, it's fine, and you know next time. Anyone would think OLB had given the little herbert ptsd.
Be sensible and nice, but still correct the error. OLB could have advised that if in doubt, Scotch whisky will always be spelled without the 'e' after the 'k' - thus giving the waiter the advantage of bejng better educated on the topic than 90% of the UK population.
Mm, OLB did ask for 'Scotch', too, which is even more differently spelt!
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
Brilliant but, as you say, can you come out with that on the spot and under pressure? Few can.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
Or just ask if any are single malts. Though there's not a lot wrong with the Bushmills one.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
Or just ask if any are single malts. Though there's not a lot wrong with the Bushmills one.
Goodness knows what he'd have ended up with if he'd asked that. Probably a strawberry milkshake.
Ruddy awful that they didn't even have an old bottle of Grouse lurking at the back of the cupboard. He said it was a nice restaurant!
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Yes, nice take. But was his tone kind? From how he's relating the incident I sense there was an edge and he feels with hindsight there could have been another way. But I could be overthinking it.
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
Or just ask if any are single malts. Though there's not a lot wrong with the Bushmills one.
Goodness knows what he'd have ended up with if he'd asked that. Probably a strawberry milkshake.
Ruddy awful that they didn't even have an old bottle of Grouse lurking at the back of the cupboard. He said it was a nice restaurant!
Quite. Or indeed a malted milkshake.
If it's any consolation, my dad once asked in a hotel for a whisky and a grapefruit (ie 2 drinks) and got them mixed, and this was in Scotland!
Horrific. I'd say that's clear murder, not manslaugher. But we know that US police are not held to account when they kill innocent people.
It seems the killer got a $30k a year medical pension 2 years later.
There are too many issues to count around this - for a start the political setup and very minimal training received by USA police officers before they are given the means and the authority to kill people will minimal consequences. For me it's a reason I won't go the USA.
The USA is a big country. Different states and even counties are quite different. That’s part of the strength of the place. As a reasonably well to do white man you are highly unlikely to encounter issues.
That's a very fair observation. But I think they have real polarisation problems, and I can't see an obvious way back.
Recently I've been reading about the USA "missing middle" from one particular angle - that of planning law - 'zoning' in the USA - and road culture.
Here, when I obtained PP for a housing estate the mix of houses from social, 2-bed, 3-bed, 4-bed was set by the Local Authority, and convenient access to Drs, Schools, Parks, Public Transport, Shops and so on was a requirement. Where schools were not adequate, the project was required to pay for the extra capacity.
Most of Western Europe is similar (can't comment on E.Europe as I am not familiar), except that the UK system often works on a finer grain.
In the US, it will be a huge area of detached family houses in most places, with no variation, minimum set-backs, minimum large plot sizes, and laws against even developing a local business - so it is a kind of legally enforced segregation into monocultural identikit dwellings. They may be lucky even to get a pavement on the roads; soccer moms are a kind of prisoner to the need to ferry kids around, until the kids get a driving license. Gives rise to some very strange mixes of tower blocks hard up against suburbs.
Horrific. I'd say that's clear murder, not manslaugher. But we know that US police are not held to account when they kill innocent people.
It seems the killer got a $30k a year medical pension 2 years later.
There are too many issues to count around this - for a start the political setup and very minimal training received by USA police officers before they are given the means and the authority to kill people will minimal consequences. For me it's a reason I won't go the USA.
The USA is a big country. Different states and even counties are quite different. That’s part of the strength of the place. As a reasonably well to do white man you are highly unlikely to encounter issues.
That's a very fair observation. But I think they have real polarisation problems, and I can't see an obvious way back.
Recently I've been reading about the USA "missing middle" from one particular angle - that of planning law - 'zoning' in the USA - and road culture.
Here, when I obtained PP for a housing estate the mix of houses from social, 2-bed, 3-bed, 4-bed was set by the Local Authority, and convenient access to Drs, Schools, Parks, Public Transport, Shops and so on was a requirement. Where schools were not adequate, the project was required to pay for the extra capacity.
Most of Western Europe is similar (can't comment on E.Europe as I am not familiar), except that the UK system often works on a finer grain.
In the US, it will be a huge area of detached family houses in most places, with no variation, minimum set-backs, minimum large plot sizes, and laws against even developing a local business - so it is a kind of legally enforced segregation into monocultural identikit dwellings. They may be lucky even to get a pavement on the roads; soccer moms are a kind of prisoner to the need to ferry kids around, until the kids get a driving license. Gives rise to some very strange mixes of tower blocks hard up against suburbs.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Yes, nice take. But was his tone kind? From how he's relating the incident I sense there was an edge and he feels with hindsight there could have been another way. But I could be overthinking it.
Well he could have continued on in a sadistic way, announcing what had been offered to his entire party and agonising over the choice, whilst speculating on whereabouts in the lochs and glens of Bonny Scotland that Jameson's and Jack Daniels hail from. Some twats would get a good 5 minutes of material out of it. Sounds to me like OLB just gave a straightforward correction.
I'd have said 'Those are both whisky, but they're not Scotch - that's always made in Scotland in a particular way that I like. Not to worry, if that's all you have I'll just have the Jameson's with some ice. Here's a way you can always tell (then go into my spiel about the 'e' - though frankly it's a bit redundant given that it will always say 'Scotch whisky' on the bottle too.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
A more positive way of approacing it would be to ask a second question ".. ah, thank you. Do you happen to have any whiskies from Scotland?" whether I would be able to think of that sponaeosly If I were in the situation is another matter.
FFS, as a former gap year waiter, occasionally you get corrected by a guest, especially if you're not trained in what you're serving. It happens, it can be a bit embarrassing, it's fine, and you know next time. Anyone would think OLB had given the little herbert ptsd.
Be sensible and nice, but still correct the error. OLB could have advised that if in doubt, Scotch whisky will always be spelled without the 'e' after the 'k' - thus giving the waiter the advantage of bejng better educated on the topic than 90% of the UK population.
We weren't there though. Only OLB and the waiter can truly comment on the nuance of what went down.
"Man found living in Austrian cellar with wife and six children born in Britain Police are investigating the illegal underground hideout discovery, which had sparked fears over a repeat of the Josef Fritzl case"
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
Well I'm no beta cuck wimp! It was just a bit awkward, I'm very much a zero confrontation kind of person and having worked as a waiter for a number of years in my youth (the worst paid and most stressful job I ever had) I tend towards the extremely undemanding in a hospitality setting - I'd have to catch you in the act of pissing in my drink before I'd complain, and even then I'd just assume you were caught short. But at times I tend towards the literal so when I asked for Scotch and the guy offered two drinks that weren't Scotch my automatic, unthinking (and probably slightly pissed) response was to point out, not in an aggressive way, that these were not Scotch. But I immediately sensed I'd hurt the guy's feelings. I think we were OK by the end of the night, anyway.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Yes, nice take. But was his tone kind? From how he's relating the incident I sense there was an edge and he feels with hindsight there could have been another way. But I could be overthinking it.
Well he could have continued on in a sadistic way, announcing what had been offered to his entire party and agonising over the choice, whilst speculating on whereabouts in the lochs and glens of Bonny Scotland that Jameson's and Jack Daniels hail from. Some twats would get a good 5 minutes of material out of it. Sounds to me like OLB just gave a straightforward correction.
I'd have said 'Those are both whisky, but they're not Scotch - that's always made in Scotland in a particular way that I like. Not to worry, if that's all you have I'll just have the Jameson's with some ice. Here's a way you can always tell (then go into my spiel about the 'e' - though frankly it's a bit redundant given that it will always say 'Scotch whisky' on the bottle too.
Had brunch with all of the cousins this morning, and inevitably the subject of the NHS came up given how many are doctors, dentists, pharmacists or otherwise in healthcare. The one cousin who is fairly senior in a large NHS trust said that the university attached to his trust attempted to increase the size of their medical school by 30% with internal funding (they're not asking for any more funding per place) but the government (he's unsure whether it's the universities department or health) has told them they can't or will face unlimited fines. The trust is ready to teach them and has the capacity, the university is ready to take them on and the patient's obviously quite desperately need doctors.
It's completely fucking mad. In a time where there's an insane global shortage of healthcare workers, an acute shortage in the UK we have a university and trust ready to increase the number of doctors they train by 30% a year for free and they're being blocked. Absolute insanity. The Tories deserve to be kicked out next year. Whoever the minister in charge that has made this decision or allowed the civil servants to block this off needs to be fired and replaced immediately.
That’s been a policy since the beginning of the NHS. The BMA loves the built in scarcity of doctors. The government uses staff numbers as part of the rationing structure of the NHS itself.
The excuses that have acreated around this are fascinating.
It is the DoH, an organ of the government that regulates training.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Role, no - influence on policy, definitely.
Some evidence please.
This is the official BMA position, expansion in numbers at all levels:
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
Have you considered starting 'Technical Analysis for Psephologists'?
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Yes, nice take. But was his tone kind? From how he's relating the incident I sense there was an edge and he feels with hindsight there could have been another way. But I could be overthinking it.
Well he could have continued on in a sadistic way, announcing what had been offered to his entire party and agonising over the choice, whilst speculating on whereabouts in the lochs and glens of Bonny Scotland that Jameson's and Jack Daniels hail from. Some twats would get a good 5 minutes of material out of it. Sounds to me like OLB just gave a straightforward correction.
I'd have said 'Those are both whisky, but they're not Scotch - that's always made in Scotland in a particular way that I like. Not to worry, if that's all you have I'll just have the Jameson's with some ice. Here's a way you can always tell (then go into my spiel about the 'e' - though frankly it's a bit redundant given that it will always say 'Scotch whisky' on the bottle too.
Ice?
Yes. Jameson's is a blended Irish whisky, it tastes fine, but it's not a sipping drink, it's a knock back (or mixer) drink, some ice to lengthen it is fine. If it was a malt or even an aged blend, no ice. No water for me either.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Yes, nice take. But was his tone kind? From how he's relating the incident I sense there was an edge and he feels with hindsight there could have been another way. But I could be overthinking it.
Well he could have continued on in a sadistic way, announcing what had been offered to his entire party and agonising over the choice, whilst speculating on whereabouts in the lochs and glens of Bonny Scotland that Jameson's and Jack Daniels hail from. Some twats would get a good 5 minutes of material out of it. Sounds to me like OLB just gave a straightforward correction.
I'd have said 'Those are both whisky, but they're not Scotch - that's always made in Scotland in a particular way that I like. Not to worry, if that's all you have I'll just have the Jameson's with some ice. Here's a way you can always tell (then go into my spiel about the 'e' - though frankly it's a bit redundant given that it will always say 'Scotch whisky' on the bottle too.
Fair enough response although on the edge of patronising. Depends on your delivery whether it stays on the right side of that line. I'm genuinely not sure what I'd have done. It's not the sort of situation you want to find yourself in.
If you are interested in learning about US crime statistics, this 2020 piece from Pew is a good place to start: For example: "Using the FBI data, the violent crime rate fell 49% between 1993 and 2019, with large decreases in the rates of robbery (-68%), murder/non-negligent manslaughter (-47%) and aggravated assault (-43%). (It’s not possible to calculate the change in the rape rate during this period because the FBI revised its definition of the offense in 2013.) Meanwhile, the property crime rate fell 55%, with big declines in the rates of burglary (-69%), motor vehicle theft (-64%) and larceny/theft (-49%).
Using the BJS statistics, the declines in the violent and property crime rates are even steeper than those reported by the FBI. Per BJS, the overall violent crime rate fell 74% between 1993 and 2019, while the property crime rate fell 71%." source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/20/facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Yes, nice take. But was his tone kind? From how he's relating the incident I sense there was an edge and he feels with hindsight there could have been another way. But I could be overthinking it.
Well he could have continued on in a sadistic way, announcing what had been offered to his entire party and agonising over the choice, whilst speculating on whereabouts in the lochs and glens of Bonny Scotland that Jameson's and Jack Daniels hail from. Some twats would get a good 5 minutes of material out of it. Sounds to me like OLB just gave a straightforward correction.
I'd have said 'Those are both whisky, but they're not Scotch - that's always made in Scotland in a particular way that I like. Not to worry, if that's all you have I'll just have the Jameson's with some ice. Here's a way you can always tell (then go into my spiel about the 'e' - though frankly it's a bit redundant given that it will always say 'Scotch whisky' on the bottle too.
Fair enough response although on the edge of patronising. Depends on your delivery whether it stays on the right side of that line. I'm genuinely not sure what I'd have done. It's not the sort of situation you want to find yourself in.
Given that you are quite literally the patron, I am not sure being patronising is entirely avoidable.
AND I am always on peoples' side, and my delivery is always pitch perfect. It's PB that gets the privilege of my grumpy side.
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
If you superimpose those two Labour lines over each other you will see how much the last week or two of the line can change as more polls come in. This makes analysing the end of the line entirely futile.
"Man found living in Austrian cellar with wife and six children born in Britain Police are investigating the illegal underground hideout discovery, which had sparked fears over a repeat of the Josef Fritzl case"
I assume the geology is a lot better for cellars in Austria - most of the country is considerably further above sea level than Britain, and they receive less rain too.
But some people prefer stories to statistics, so here is one that probably has not received international attention:
Recently in this area (greater Seattle) a fifteen year old girl took her grandmother's car for a joy ride, with a friend or two along with her. (She was living with her grandmother which, in this country, generally means that both her father and mother had failed her. Sixteen is the legal drving age in this state.)
She saw a man running for exercise along the side of the road. She swerved, hit him, and killed him.
It won't receive international attention because the sex and race of the perpetrator and the victim are wrong, for most journalists a black girl killing a white man -- for fun -- just isn't an attractive story, especially with no guns involved.
"Man found living in Austrian cellar with wife and six children born in Britain Police are investigating the illegal underground hideout discovery, which had sparked fears over a repeat of the Josef Fritzl case"
That article about having books in the house being smug and middle class attracted a lot of comment and derision. But it comes from a long line of "Love something? This is why it is bad" school of journalism. Thread:
The Guardian took a definite turn towards more and more of this stuff under its current editor. It’s pretty much unreadable these days, apart from the odd columnist.
Rhiannon Lucy Coslett, the author of the first article bemoaning the middle classness of owning books (despite her name being incredibly middle class), once wrote an article about the horrors of 'spidermanning' sweeping University campuses. Without being crass, she described a form of sexual assault where a male and female would be having consensual sex, while unbeknownst to the young woman, his friends would be masturbating on the other side of the door. Upon ejaculation, the group of young men would burst into the room and throw sperm on the young woman.
I remember this article, since I was at University, and it struck me as wildly impractical. The logistics alone would put the Dolittle raid to shame. I don't doubt it happened to someone, somewhere, but it made me think that Ms Coslett was rather naive to suggest it as a widespread practice and that she was taken in. On the other hand, it may have been that she had a deadline to meet and a lack of material with which to meet it.
Rhiannon Lucy Coslett may sound middle-class to the English.
But, she is a Welsh speaker from Gwynedd. And her life has not been easy.
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
I gave up arguing the budget should have done something about eggs, becuase I was getting a battering on here. But truth is Lady Thatcher would have done something about eggs and milk because it’s the very poorest households and foodbanks suffering from that rise in basics, and this government are currently giving the very comfortably off a hand out to heat their private pools.
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
If you superimpose those two Labour lines over each other you will see how much the last week or two of the line can change as more polls come in. This makes analysing the end of the line entirely futile.
Can I remind posters that the next GE may be nearly two years away? 😈
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
If you superimpose those two Labour lines over each other you will see how much the last week or two of the line can change as more polls come in. This makes analysing the end of the line entirely futile.
Given that the disparity between firms is significantly greater than the variation of any one firm, the change in the end of the graphs tends to reflect which polling firms have reported last. The difference between deltapoll and peoplepolling for the conservatives is around 9% - a function of systematic decisions rather than general polling variation.
It is important to compare any change with the same polling's firm. So taking the last reporting polling company Omnisis - it has conservatives polling in January - 27,28,24,26 - may well be general polling variation rather than a trend with 24 being an outlier?
But some people prefer stories to statistics, so here is one that probably has not received international attention:
Recently in this area (greater Seattle) a fifteen year old girl took her grandmother's car for a joy ride, with a friend or two along with her. (She was living with her grandmother which, in this country, generally means that both her father and mother had failed her. Sixteen is the legal drving age in this state.)
She saw a man running for exercise along the side of the road. She swerved, hit him, and killed him.
It won't receive international attention because the sex and race of the perpetrator and the victim are wrong, for most journalists a black girl killing a white man -- for fun -- just isn't an attractive story, especially with no guns involved.
If it was intentional, you have to wonder whether some poisonous media had she consumed had justified that on some level as an act of revenge.
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
That article about having books in the house being smug and middle class attracted a lot of comment and derision. But it comes from a long line of "Love something? This is why it is bad" school of journalism. Thread:
The Guardian took a definite turn towards more and more of this stuff under its current editor. It’s pretty much unreadable these days, apart from the odd columnist.
Rhiannon Lucy Coslett, the author of the first article bemoaning the middle classness of owning books (despite her name being incredibly middle class), once wrote an article about the horrors of 'spidermanning' sweeping University campuses. Without being crass, she described a form of sexual assault where a male and female would be having consensual sex, while unbeknownst to the young woman, his friends would be masturbating on the other side of the door. Upon ejaculation, the group of young men would burst into the room and throw sperm on the young woman.
I remember this article, since I was at University, and it struck me as wildly impractical. The logistics alone would put the Dolittle raid to shame. I don't doubt it happened to someone, somewhere, but it made me think that Ms Coslett was rather naive to suggest it as a widespread practice and that she was taken in. On the other hand, it may have been that she had a deadline to meet and a lack of material with which to meet it.
Rhiannon Lucy Coslett may sound middle-class to the English.
But, she is a Welsh speaker from Gwynedd. And her life has not been easy.
But some people prefer stories to statistics, so here is one that probably has not received international attention:
Recently in this area (greater Seattle) a fifteen year old girl took her grandmother's car for a joy ride, with a friend or two along with her. (She was living with her grandmother which, in this country, generally means that both her father and mother had failed her. Sixteen is the legal drving age in this state.)
She saw a man running for exercise along the side of the road. She swerved, hit him, and killed him.
It won't receive international attention because the sex and race of the perpetrator and the victim are wrong, for most journalists a black girl killing a white man -- for fun -- just isn't an attractive story, especially with no guns involved.
If it was intentional, you have to wonder whether some poisonous media had she consumed had justified that on some level as an act of revenge.
No big deal when she did it in GTA. Is real life different?
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
Two points: of course everyone should have X% pay rise but out of what resource is the tax payer/customer going to fund it?
Secondly, and slightly mysteriously, the Co-Op. This is socially owned. It is generally much more expensive than Lidl/Aldi, which aren't. Why does the socialist supermarket generally charge the downtrodden poor customer so much more than the capitalist one. Doesn't the capitalist exist to grind the faces of the poor, and doesn't the Co-Op exist to do the opposite?
"Man found living in Austrian cellar with wife and six children born in Britain Police are investigating the illegal underground hideout discovery, which had sparked fears over a repeat of the Josef Fritzl case"
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
I gave up arguing the budget should have done something about eggs, becuase I was getting a battering on here. But truth is Lady Thatcher would have done something about eggs and milk because it’s the very poorest households and foodbanks suffering from that rise in basics, and this government are currently giving the very comfortably off a hand out to heat their private pools.
Quite. Regarding dairy, we were the only country in the EU to have a dairy quota under CAP that was smaller than the requirement of our population. UK dairy production deserves every bit of Government support it can get now that we've left, but is of course deeply unfashionable. So let's reward farmers for turning farm land into scrubland or solar farms instead.
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
Have you considered starting 'Technical Analysis for Psephologists'?
That’s very kind and lot better than some of the sarcky replies I get, thank you.
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
Two points: of course everyone should have X% pay rise but out of what resource is the tax payer/customer going to fund it?
Secondly, and slightly mysteriously, the Co-Op. This is socially owned. It is generally much more expensive than Lidl/Aldi, which aren't. Why does the socialist supermarket generally charge the downtrodden poor customer so much more than the capitalist one. Doesn't the capitalist exist to grind the faces of the poor, and doesn't the Co-Op exist to do the opposite?
Oddly, I've seen conversations between people who work in supermarkets almost all saying the Co-Op was the worst employer out of the bunch. I'd understand the higher prices if they were treating their staff way better than, say, Tesco - but apparently not.
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
The Tories need to bring the War to an end, otherwise they have no hope in 2024.
But the Tories are in fact so stupid that they are actively pursuing policies that ensure the War is dragged out for a long time.
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
Eggs are rationed in my local Tesco.
Egg supplies are under pressure due to bird flu, but currently £2.29 for a dozen at Aldi.
But some people prefer stories to statistics, so here is one that probably has not received international attention:
Recently in this area (greater Seattle) a fifteen year old girl took her grandmother's car for a joy ride, with a friend or two along with her. (She was living with her grandmother which, in this country, generally means that both her father and mother had failed her. Sixteen is the legal drving age in this state.)
She saw a man running for exercise along the side of the road. She swerved, hit him, and killed him.
It won't receive international attention because the sex and race of the perpetrator and the victim are wrong, for most journalists a black girl killing a white man -- for fun -- just isn't an attractive story, especially with no guns involved.
Just nipped to my nearest co-op to pick up a few essentials I didn't want to drive for. Not a place I visit often, but I'm there once or twice a month. Noticed eggs were up to £2.60 for six, up from £2.50 a couple of weeks ago.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
Eggs are rationed in my local Tesco.
Egg supplies are under pressure due to bird flu, but currently £2.29 for a dozen at Aldi.
--- Egg farmer Ioan Humphreys has called out supermarkets for “not paying egg farmers”, instead blaming avian flu on the shortages of eggs on the shelves.
Taking to social media, Humphreys posted a video contradicting supermarket claims that egg shortages are occurring due to avian flu, stating that retailers are raising prices for the customer but not paying enough for farmers to continue producing eggs.
Humphreys said: “Supermarkets are going to tell you the egg shortages is because of avian flu. Which to be fair, there has been a lot of cases of avian flu. But you want to know the real reason why there’s an egg shortage is because the supermarkets won’t pay the farmers for the eggs.”
He revealed supermarkets have upped their prices for consumers, however, this increase has not been filtered through to farmers. ---
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
If you superimpose those two Labour lines over each other you will see how much the last week or two of the line can change as more polls come in. This makes analysing the end of the line entirely futile.
Given that the disparity between firms is significantly greater than the variation of any one firm, the change in the end of the graphs tends to reflect which polling firms have reported last. The difference between deltapoll and peoplepolling for the conservatives is around 9% - a function of systematic decisions rather than general polling variation.
It is important to compare any change with the same polling's firm. So taking the last reporting polling company Omnisis - it has conservatives polling in January - 27,28,24,26 - may well be general polling variation rather than a trend with 24 being an outlier?
I use an exponential moving average of polls with smoothing factor of 0.1to iron out MOEs and fade over time. Over the last 6 months it looks like this. It looks flat to me recently.
All Starmer has to do is lie low and say nuffin. To be fair, he's basically doing that. There's a growing feeling that 'It's their turn now.'
Short of Corbyn returning, or a major catastrophe being averted by Rishi in a superman costume, this will play to its close.
“All Starmer has to do is lie low and say nuffin.“
Wasn’t that Their idea in 1992 election? So I disagree.
You must always be aggressive in rebuttal, and work on your perceived weaknesses in eyes of voters. They need to turn Starmer into Uncle Starmer - man of the people. It’s easy, just work on his human side, where he grew up, etc. AND They need to get policy idea’s out there. Lots more policy idea’s. If some are nicked by Tories that just hurts the Tories.
"Wasn’t that Their idea in 1992 election? So I disagree."
The fabled triumphlist Festival Of Kinnock Stadium-Sized Campaign Event would suggest that wasn't quite the plan. Even without the impromptu "we're all right"ing.
The fabled triumphlist Festival Of Kinnock Stadium-Sized Campaign Event would suggest they actually were complacent. All around that event of yours they hid unliked mouthy in a potting shed whilst his opponent was in markets on a soap box getting egged as he engaged the voters with idea’s and policy. Labour were sucked in by poll leads and “ours to lose let’s be careful out there” complacency.
Aside from poll leads, what was “best for PM” “best party for economy” saying. If Labour trailed on those they needed to be out their fixing it with gusto. You have to rethink your last post don’t you?
First, that wasn't "my" campaign event in any sense. I voted Tory throughout the 1990s, and thought Labour's 1992 campaign was poor.
However, I think that is the wrong lesson you took from that campaign's failure. It wasn't that Labour were hiding, it was that they thought they could run the campaign through the media alone.
They also thought that Major was a net negative for the Conservatives.
The Tories wisely realised that Major was actually an asset, and that there is no substitute for footslogging.
Blair, on the other hand, *did* learn the lessons of that campaign, marrying footslogging with the media game. And of course he had the huge advantage of polling leads driven by Black Wednesday to work with.
ETA: and of course Labour's poll leads were minuscule-to-negative in the run-up to the 1992 GE, lest we forget that detail.
I don’t think we are far apart on agreement in this discussion, though I need to see more movement from you on a couple of aspects.
“Labour's poll leads were minuscule-to-negative in the run-up to the 1992 GE, lest we forget that detail.” The detail is they were consistent, never behind till the last big poll in last 24 hours, and their lead backed up by council and by elections actual votes right up till election called.
What was Kinnock doing in a potting shed with days to go in a tight campaign other than hiding? If his own team saw him as a weakness they need to tackle that head on, not hide him.
On the polling - from March 11th (the day the GE was announced) to the 8th of April there were 11 polls showing a Tory lead, 2 ties - one of each being in the week running up to polling day.
But I *will* happily clarify in my position on the notion that they feared Kinnock was a liability. They did. And they were right.
Has Major still got his soapbox he could lend Rishi (otherwise Rishi might try and get his from Harrods which probably wouldn't have quite the same impact!)
A BMG poll for i shows that voters are now almost evenly divided over the question of rejoining the EU with nearly one in 10 Leave supporters backing a move to reverse Brexit.
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
An 18 lead in the last BMG, so a positive Tory poll for HY to talk up there.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
For comparison, graphlines on 24th was this.
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
If you superimpose those two Labour lines over each other you will see how much the last week or two of the line can change as more polls come in. This makes analysing the end of the line entirely futile.
Given that the disparity between firms is significantly greater than the variation of any one firm, the change in the end of the graphs tends to reflect which polling firms have reported last. The difference between deltapoll and peoplepolling for the conservatives is around 9% - a function of systematic decisions rather than general polling variation.
It is important to compare any change with the same polling's firm. So taking the last reporting polling company Omnisis - it has conservatives polling in January - 27,28,24,26 - may well be general polling variation rather than a trend with 24 being an outlier?
I use an exponential moving average of polls with smoothing factor of 0.1to iron out MOEs and fade over time. Over the last 6 months it looks like this. It looks flat to me recently.
I mean, they seem to have much the effect on you mention of the DfE has on me, and with (so far as can be judged) much less reason.
I've got a piece coming up in the next few days about Scottish independence, I use my knowledge of Scotland that allowed me to correctly predict Scotland would remain part of the UK in 2014.
The piece is going to be headlined
'Will the Scots bottle it again?'
Depends on whether the Scotch experts advise it is a whisky strategy.
I was out with some friends the other night and asked if they had any Scotch, the waiter said he'd check and came back saying yes, we have Jack Daniels or Jamiesons! I pointed out that neither of these were Scotch but immediately felt like a dick. I'm not sure what the polite answer would have been, I suppose I just took offence as a Scotsman! The waiter seemed pissed off for the rest of the evening. Very awkward.
Sympathies. It's usually best to avoid any hint of confrontation with waiters (even difficult ones) but if you don't particularly like Irish or Bourbon you're between a rock and a hard place there. Through no fault of your own you're in a tough spot. Either you call out the error (feels pompous) or you go ahead and order a JD or a Jamiesons (beta cuck wimp behaviour). You feel bad either way. It's the sort of ostensibly small thing that can cast a shadow over an otherwise nice evening. Which I can tell it did with how you're telling the story.
OLB should feel happy that he has educated that waiter in a kind way, where he might have been educated in a less kind way by a future customer.
Yes, nice take. But was his tone kind? From how he's relating the incident I sense there was an edge and he feels with hindsight there could have been another way. But I could be overthinking it.
Well he could have continued on in a sadistic way, announcing what had been offered to his entire party and agonising over the choice, whilst speculating on whereabouts in the lochs and glens of Bonny Scotland that Jameson's and Jack Daniels hail from. Some twats would get a good 5 minutes of material out of it. Sounds to me like OLB just gave a straightforward correction.
I'd have said 'Those are both whisky, but they're not Scotch - that's always made in Scotland in a particular way that I like. Not to worry, if that's all you have I'll just have the Jameson's with some ice. Here's a way you can always tell (then go into my spiel about the 'e' - though frankly it's a bit redundant given that it will always say 'Scotch whisky' on the bottle too.
Ice?
Yes. Jameson's is a blended Irish whisky, it tastes fine, but it's not a sipping drink, it's a knock back (or mixer) drink, some ice to lengthen it is fine. If it was a malt or even an aged blend, no ice. No water for me either.
But some people prefer stories to statistics, so here is one that probably has not received international attention:
Recently in this area (greater Seattle) a fifteen year old girl took her grandmother's car for a joy ride, with a friend or two along with her. (She was living with her grandmother which, in this country, generally means that both her father and mother had failed her. Sixteen is the legal drving age in this state.)
She saw a man running for exercise along the side of the road. She swerved, hit him, and killed him.
It won't receive international attention because the sex and race of the perpetrator and the victim are wrong, for most journalists a black girl killing a white man -- for fun -- just isn't an attractive story, especially with no guns involved.
Comments
Is the BMA the official qualification body? I suppose they could literally refuse to register any more. Twats.
I think the issue is that some was allowed to let their personal preferences get through...
The more I deal with High Court crime the more I am inclined to tell some of my civil clients to grow up. Discussions suggest that this is quite a common view amongst those who have done prosecution work.
I have no words!
All being well he'll be out on the 3rd.
BMA likes scarcity for doctors
Importing medical staff saved on training costs
Medical training is expensive - history degrees are cheap.
Rationing by scarcity of resources is how demand is controlled in the NHS - since 1945
What happens is that a group of interests hardens into a systemic policy. It Is How Things Are Done.
Thatcher was widely hated in the civil service for her ability to break such department policies. The invective in internal memos about her obsession with CFCs and then C02 emissions are quite instructive.
And because doctors and nurses need a more tangible kind of education - and aptitude?
But, she is a Welsh speaker from Gwynedd. And her life has not been easy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-44876858
So I am sympathetic.
She does write some complete bollocks, some of the time.
We all do. Even the normally excellent @ydoethur writes of plutonium meteorites
During COVID, due to the exam fuckup, some uni courses expanded 25% - there is, apparently no evidence of a quality problem. The state education system fails millions who could have gone into better things.
I’ve been through both private and state education, as have my daughters. Private simply makes better use of those who are willing to learn - they have the resources and the independence to do that.
The people are there - their potential un-tapped.
"This mirrors what happened with the Epping Forest. In the late 19th Century it was Victorian era people power that saved this last substantial part of the woods that once covered most of Southern England. It was part of the larger Waltham Forest and would once have joined up with Hanault Forest and this leftover fragment of Gorne Wood.
Ordinary people demonstrated for it's saviour until the richest public authority of the time; The City of London Corporation; agreed to buy it and police it under an act of Parliament in 1878, which they have done incredibly well ever since.
Adjacent householders and farmers to the forest have their territories marked and if anyone moves a fence by half a metre into the Forest, they receive an enforcement order to move it."
The Bee Gees don’t. They’re fabulous.
https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/1619348273659281411?s=61&t=XWACjFjx2K-44RGEZF5I2A
Re gait I've seen a podiatrist already who has given me orthotics, I over-pronate relatively severely.
The BMA has no role at all in deciding numbers trained, either Undergraduate or Postgraduate.
Stodge! Where are you? This March festival is short of all conquering superstars in form? It’s going to be very hard to pick winners this year?
Clare Drakeford, the wife of Wales' First Minister Mark Drakeford, has died suddenly, the Welsh government said.
Terrible news.
Hope you pick up too.
Not being able to run would have certainly knocked me right down a year ago but I am coping and getting by. This is only anecdotal but this is the first winter I've taken Vitamin D daily (have been taking it since late August) and I am sure I've seen an improvement in my mood.
Now I've got through January I'll certainly be coping much better, as I find the spring and summer much easier and indeed these are my favourite months.
I am seeing my therapist now just once a month for support.
Really in a good place, just hope I can get back to running long distance by the summer!
This is the official BMA position, expansion in numbers at all levels:
https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/nhs-delivery-and-workforce/workforce/nhs-medical-staffing-data-analysis
The survey also suggests that Rishi Sunak’s polling bounce is now over with the Conservative lagging Labour by 17 points and the Prime Minister’s approval ratings trailing far behind Sir Keir Starmer’s.
Worryingly for the Conservatives, they are less trusted than Labour on almost every single issue, including the economy, immigration, healthcare, education, housing and crime. Issues like security, the handling of Covid-19 and the Ukraine war are the only exceptions.
I am not in the BMA, but for as long as I remember they have supported expansion of places.
— expect it by end of Feb
— it will look at how UK interacts with ECHR
— ministers think if it doesn’t work govt could fight next election on leaving ECHR
It all just rings so hollow, they've had 13 years
"Man found living in Austrian cellar with wife and six children born in Britain
Police are investigating the illegal underground hideout discovery, which had sparked fears over a repeat of the Josef Fritzl case"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/01/27/man-found-living-austrian-cellar-wife-six-children-born-britain/
But I *will* happily clarify in my position on the notion that they feared Kinnock was a liability. They did. And they were right.
Do you have a link to this poll?
It’s an Opinium night and I’m going 28-45. 17% lead with swing back built in.
Be sensible and nice, but still correct the error. OLB could have advised that if in doubt, Scotch whisky will always be spelled without the 'e' after the 'k' - thus giving the waiter the advantage of bejng better educated on the topic than 90% of the UK population.
Ruddy awful that they didn't even have an old bottle of Grouse lurking at the back of the cupboard. He said it was a nice restaurant!
On 28th this.
If Graphs don’t lie, then that’s a steep uphill for my marble to climb on the Lab line. And it will roll off the end on the Tory line.
Has there been anything on the news narrative to change the polls like this?
Surely the Opinium picks up on this trend?
If it's any consolation, my dad once asked in a hotel for a whisky and a grapefruit (ie 2 drinks) and got them mixed, and this was in Scotland!
Recently I've been reading about the USA "missing middle" from one particular angle - that of planning law - 'zoning' in the USA - and road culture.
Here, when I obtained PP for a housing estate the mix of houses from social, 2-bed, 3-bed, 4-bed was set by the Local Authority, and convenient access to Drs, Schools, Parks, Public Transport, Shops and so on was a requirement. Where schools were not adequate, the project was required to pay for the extra capacity.
Most of Western Europe is similar (can't comment on E.Europe as I am not familiar), except that the UK system often works on a finer grain.
In the US, it will be a huge area of detached family houses in most places, with no variation, minimum set-backs, minimum large plot sizes, and laws against even developing a local business - so it is a kind of legally enforced segregation into monocultural identikit dwellings. They may be lucky even to get a pavement on the roads; soccer moms are a kind of prisoner to the need to ferry kids around, until the kids get a driving license. Gives rise to some very strange mixes of tower blocks hard up against suburbs.
Quite fascinating stuff.
I'd have said 'Those are both whisky, but they're not Scotch - that's always made in Scotland in a particular way that I like. Not to worry, if that's all you have I'll just have the Jameson's with some ice. Here's a way you can always tell (then go into my spiel about the 'e' - though frankly it's a bit redundant given that it will always say 'Scotch whisky' on the bottle too.
https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a748
Edit, note in that article they also voted for a complete ban on opening new medical schools.
For example: "Using the FBI data, the violent crime rate fell 49% between 1993 and 2019, with large decreases in the rates of robbery (-68%), murder/non-negligent manslaughter (-47%) and aggravated assault (-43%). (It’s not possible to calculate the change in the rape rate during this period because the FBI revised its definition of the offense in 2013.) Meanwhile, the property crime rate fell 55%, with big declines in the rates of burglary (-69%), motor vehicle theft (-64%) and larceny/theft (-49%).
Using the BJS statistics, the declines in the violent and property crime rates are even steeper than those reported by the FBI. Per BJS, the overall violent crime rate fell 74% between 1993 and 2019, while the property crime rate fell 71%."
source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/11/20/facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/
There was a sharp rise in violent crime at the beginning of the COVID epidemic, but that seems to be easing off.
https://www.hsdl.org/c/fbi-releases-2021-crime-statistics/
AND I am always on peoples' side, and my delivery is always pitch perfect. It's PB that gets the privilege of my grumpy side.
Two pound sixty for six eggs. That's why the Tories are getting castrated in the polls. Ordinary people can see prices going up and up and up every month, with no end in sight.
And their answer? Let's bash the unions, let's fight the nurses, let's go to war with the ambulance drivers. When most sensible people can see even a 10% pay rise isn't unreasonable when prices are going up month on month.
Recently in this area (greater Seattle) a fifteen year old girl took her grandmother's car for a joy ride, with a friend or two along with her. (She was living with her grandmother which, in this country, generally means that both her father and mother had failed her. Sixteen is the legal drving age in this state.)
She saw a man running for exercise along the side of the road. She swerved, hit him, and killed him.
It won't receive international attention because the sex and race of the perpetrator and the victim are wrong, for most journalists a black girl killing a white man -- for fun -- just isn't an attractive story, especially with no guns involved.
“I am not a typical Austrian. A typical Austrian buys a house, builds a dungeon in the cellar, and imprisons his daughter in it.”
*it was an autocorrect fail, but it says something that my autocorrect assumes I mean 'DfE' when I typed 'DfT.'
It is important to compare any change with the same polling's firm. So taking the last reporting polling company Omnisis - it has conservatives polling in January - 27,28,24,26 - may well be general polling variation rather than a trend with 24 being an outlier?
Secondly, and slightly mysteriously, the Co-Op. This is socially owned. It is generally much more expensive than Lidl/Aldi, which aren't. Why does the socialist supermarket generally charge the downtrodden poor customer so much more than the capitalist one. Doesn't the capitalist exist to grind the faces of the poor, and doesn't the Co-Op exist to do the opposite?
But the Tories are in fact so stupid that they are actively pursuing policies that ensure the War is dragged out for a long time.
This way they are facing a shellacking in 2024.
---
Egg farmer Ioan Humphreys has called out supermarkets for “not paying egg farmers”, instead blaming avian flu on the shortages of eggs on the shelves.
Taking to social media, Humphreys posted a video contradicting supermarket claims that egg shortages are occurring due to avian flu, stating that retailers are raising prices for the customer but not paying enough for farmers to continue producing eggs.
Humphreys said: “Supermarkets are going to tell you the egg shortages is because of avian flu. Which to be fair, there has been a lot of cases of avian flu. But you want to know the real reason why there’s an egg shortage is because the supermarkets won’t pay the farmers for the eggs.”
He revealed supermarkets have upped their prices for consumers, however, this increase has not been filtered through to farmers.
---
Over the last 6 months it looks like this. It looks flat to me recently.
Love your graph and EMA posts