I'm not sure if it's the time of the season (as some zombie once sang) but there are some extraordinary polls about.
In Iceland, the Independence Party which has dominated Icelandic politics since the dissolution of the union with Denmark in 1944, is now second in the polls behind the Social Democrats.
Conversely, in Denmark, the Social Democrats are on just 18.6% in the latest Voxmeter poll, their lowest showing in more than a decade and if repeated in a General Election would be the worst result since 1915. They led with the Socialist Folkeparti in second and Venstre in a tie for third with the Liberal Alliance.
Yes, remarkable! Just one poll as they say but SIX points down, with no single party benefiting especially. Any idea why?
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
According to Wikipedia: "Today, the [Chinese] population continues to grow." And -- if you look at the big table -- declined about 1 million in 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China (As far as I can tell, the second is closer to being correct.)
I am not a demographer, much less one specializing in such difficult nations as China, but I think that the current estimates of China's population are probably accurate to within 10 million, but may not be accurate to within 1 million.
A few months ago, I was amazed to discover that Mrs J had never watched it (I used to go to see it in Leicester Square in the 1990s on ?Wednesdays?, amongst all the other freaks). So we watched it, and she loved it.
An absolute classic.
Pretty sure Mrs S won’t have watched it either.
It’s just a jump to the left…
"It's astounding, time is fleeting, madness takes its toll."
Going to the ?Prince Charles? theatre to see it with my then-gf was brilliant back in 1991. You had loads of people in drag, many like us in 'normal' clothes, all singing along to the tunes.
I can't sing, and no-one minded. It was effing superb.
I've just looked it up, and it still seems they occasionally do it still. In the evenings occasionally, when I thought it was every Wednesday afternoon. But such memories...
If you caveated the question with , “ even though the policy could lead to genuine refugees being deported “ I think the polling would be somewhat different .
The debate sadly looks like turning into black v white with little grey. The sight of the UK turning away real asylum seekers and adding to their trauma is an utterly shameful day for this country.
Why we are going to do it in the next couple of decades anyway when climate change inspired migration pushes us over the edge of being accepting. The world ahead is going to be a lot bleaker place with less room for strangers and more protective of "Us". I suspect most people who think like you will be just as up in arms when it comes time to reduce our daily water ration to 2 litres a day so we can take in more asylum seekers.
The UK is already a country where we have water shortages, increase the population by even 20% and we are going to be in dire straits. Same is true of many european countries
What we’re seeing at the moment is a mere drop in the ocean, a barely discernible pinprick, compared to how bad migration is going to get in 20-30 years time due to climate change.
Those on the move could number in the hundreds of millions.
I doubt that's true. I don't think that the world warming up a bit (fi that's what it does) is going to be that bad.
No its going to be bad, what you think really doesn't matter because its already happening and even in western countries increased temperatures are becoming a problem let alone hotter countries
I don't think they're becoming a problem. The problem I see is that the proposed cure is worse than the disease.
I certainly am not advocating the measures suggest by the loonier greens out there, I don't think a cure will even be attempted merely tinkering around the edges such as we are now because when push comes to shove governments will make sure voters don't see any drop in living standards and hope other countries will do enough to stop it. It is not going to be stopped but will be ameliorated enough to make some countries still habitable by such things as renewable energy etc. I fully expect those countries however to look after their own and hang the rest out to dry
Tinkering around the edges is fine. Any actual cure would probably be so wrong-headed as to be disastrous. We can only see through the lense of our times. It is always a very distorted lense.
Well to you at least but then you have always looked at things through your conspiracy theory goggles.....who can forget your theories on MH71 and ivermectin
Not sure about forgetting them, but inventing them certainly. I've never typed the word 'ivermectin' on this forum.
Ah yes sorry you were the zinc guy, your swallowing every propaganda line from russia on MH71 was still correct though
Apology accepted.
It's not a conspiracy theory - it would be totally unprecedented historically if we did not see things through a distorted lense, as they did when they wore lead make-up, or when they thought the earth was flat, or when they thought that we would all be driving nuclear powered cars. It is difficult to discern where we have really progressed and built on the knowledge of previous generations, and what are just the vulgar excesses of our age. I believe that most climate alarmism belongs in the latter category.
What has that got to do with your nasty stupidity over MH17?
Have you read the Dutch report(s) yet?
I think readers of both our posts can be the judges which of us has the nastier and more stupid output.
A few months ago, I was amazed to discover that Mrs J had never watched it (I used to go to see it in Leicester Square in the 1990s on ?Wednesdays?, amongst all the other freaks). So we watched it, and she loved it.
An absolute classic.
Pretty sure Mrs S won’t have watched it either.
It’s just a jump to the left…
"It's astounding, time is fleeting, madness takes its toll."
Going to the ?Prince Charles? theatre to see it with my then-gf was brilliant back in 1991. You had loads of people in drag, many like us in 'normal' clothes, all singing along to the tunes.
I can't sing, and no-one minded. It was effing superb.
I've just looked it up, and it still seems they occasionally do it still. In the evenings occasionally, when I thought it was every Wednesday afternoon. But such memories...
According to Wikipedia: "Today, the [Chinese] population continues to grow." And -- if you look at the big table -- declined about 1 million in 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China (As far as I can tell, the second is closer to being correct.)
I am not a demographer, much less one specializing in such difficult nations as China, but I think that the current estimates of China's population are probably accurate to within 10 million, but may not be accurate to within 1 million.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
According to Wikipedia: "Today, the [Chinese] population continues to grow." And -- if you look at the big table -- declined about 1 million in 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China (As far as I can tell, the second is closer to being correct.)
I am not a demographer, much less one specializing in such difficult nations as China, but I think that the current estimates of China's population are probably accurate to within 10 million, but may not be accurate to within 1 million.
Just seen a round-up of Michelle Donellan doing the morning press round really struggling on small boats and knighthood for Stanley. At one point she said "I'm not the immigration minister, I'm the SofS for Education. At least the interviewer was kind enough not to say "I know, unbelievable isn't it?"
At least she wasn't asked why her department continues to employ a chief of OFSTED who literally doesn't know what safeguarding is.
I encountered, in my early days in the city, a derivatives trader who was unaware that
- the pricing systems used the Bank of England base rate as a parameter - the Bank of England base rate had changed yesterday
He was therefore somewhat surprised that all the pricing numbers had changed. And rang me to complain.
For context - this is similar to a fisherman being unaware that water is wet.
Water is only 'wet' between 0 degrees C and 100 degrees C, at normal pressures.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
A few months ago, I was amazed to discover that Mrs J had never watched it (I used to go to see it in Leicester Square in the 1990s on ?Wednesdays?, amongst all the other freaks). So we watched it, and she loved it.
An absolute classic.
Pretty sure Mrs S won’t have watched it either.
It’s just a jump to the left…
"It's astounding, time is fleeting, madness takes its toll."
Going to the ?Prince Charles? theatre to see it with my then-gf was brilliant back in 1991. You had loads of people in drag, many like us in 'normal' clothes, all singing along to the tunes.
I can't sing, and no-one minded. It was effing superb.
I've just looked it up, and it still seems they occasionally do it still. In the evenings occasionally, when I thought it was every Wednesday afternoon. But such memories...
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
So you expect the old bill to check every road and nook and cranny.. impossible People go.missing all the time...they might have been at a party....
Don’t know the full circumstances, and I am sure there will be extenuating circumstances, but sometimes people don’t pick up when something might be wrong. Like my runner friend who took 7 GP visits to convince the GP to refer him on, whereupon a heart condition was discovered. It’s probable that the folk in the crash were not those to go missing without texting or contact, so families would be desperate.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
So you expect the old bill to check every road and nook and cranny.. impossible People go.missing all the time...they might have been at a party....
Presumably the police could have checked where their phones were.
People go missing, yes, but this was a whole car full disappearing without trace.
Quite. It’s not 1978. We have so much ability to track things (cars, via ANPR, phones etc). A few quick checks would have helped. No idea if any of the three who died might have lived if found sooner, but that will haunt the families and probably the plod too now.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Most big companies these days have AI scan the CV before it ever reaches a human. If "computer says no" due to there not being enough relevant keywords, the CV gets binned without a real human being ever figuring out if the person has the kind of transferable skills or the right attitude that would enable them to succeed at the job.
Helping someone past that initial stage and into a competitive interview where they have the chance to prove themselves on their own merit isn't wrong at all. Ultimately, you're not hiring them - just vouching for someone and saying "I reckon this person is worth giving a chance". Which is how 99% of people end up in jobs anyway...
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It's the real world. Companies want to hire people who are good and listening to someone like you is part of the process.
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Don’t fret about it. If she’s not eligible they won’t hire her. If she is, and she’s good, she might be hired.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
On immigration. The problem is not just about "people taking the piss"
It is the perception that between a bunch of laws ('uman rights is invoked a bit like Elf & Safety), nothing can be done. You just have to shut up and sit in a corner.
This is the worst possible method of setting a debate in a democratic country.
I've already commented on the nasty farce that is the removal of citizenship at the whim of the Home Sec. - this was created precisely because of the idea that there were people we couldn't try, couldn't send abroad to be tried, despite being criminals. I'm sure some legal theorists patted themselves on the back at the genius of how they defeated all those old fashioned treason laws. The reaction was utterly inevitable.
constitutions are made for men, not men for constitutions
This whole tragedy is probably going to end up with many many dead people. In the Med, in the Channel, on the Tex/Mex border. And elsewhere
In the end native populations will not allow themselves to be swamped by desperate incomers. It’s basic, brutal human nature
The ideal for the UK would be to find a tough but fair Oz-style solution before it gets that grim. I fear the bleeding hearts will prevent that, and we will end up with something quite horrific
The problem I have with all this is that a lot has happened already, without any revolt of the 'native populations'. The pattern of the post war era is that any revolt of the native population gets killed off politically. Won't that pattern just keep on repeating itself? These issues (opposition to asylum seekers, etc) keep on being associated with an old, dying demographic. You never see any young people taking on these issues. Or if they do, it is someone politically toxic like Tommy Robinson. Meanwhile, if you look at the UK, and in particular the cities where things happen, like London, Birmingham and Manchester... it keeps getting more and more multi-racial and diverse. I feel like the current conservative party policy, in this as with a lot of issues, is just the rage against the dying of the light.
Although Brexit may be seen as an example of a revolt of the native populations.
1823 - Ashanti esteem the Golden Stool as manifestation of national identity
2023 - "True" Tories esteem a Gold-Platted Turd (aka Boris Johnson MPxPM) as manifestation of national identity
According to Wikipedia: "Today, the [Chinese] population continues to grow." And -- if you look at the big table -- declined about 1 million in 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China (As far as I can tell, the second is closer to being correct.)
I am not a demographer, much less one specializing in such difficult nations as China, but I think that the current estimates of China's population are probably accurate to within 10 million, but may not be accurate to within 1 million.
“Three Years of Difficulty” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine … In the second half of 1959, I took a long-distance bus from Xinyang to Luoshan and Gushi. Out of the window, I saw one corpse after another in the ditches. On the bus, no one dared to mention the dead. In one county, Guangshan, one-third of the people had died. Although there were dead people everywhere, the local leaders enjoyed good meals and fine liquor. ... I had seen people who had told the truth being destroyed. Did I dare to write it?..
If you caveated the question with , “ even though the policy could lead to genuine refugees being deported “ I think the polling would be somewhat different .
The debate sadly looks like turning into black v white with little grey. The sight of the UK turning away real asylum seekers and adding to their trauma is an utterly shameful day for this country.
Why we are going to do it in the next couple of decades anyway when climate change inspired migration pushes us over the edge of being accepting. The world ahead is going to be a lot bleaker place with less room for strangers and more protective of "Us". I suspect most people who think like you will be just as up in arms when it comes time to reduce our daily water ration to 2 litres a day so we can take in more asylum seekers.
The UK is already a country where we have water shortages, increase the population by even 20% and we are going to be in dire straits. Same is true of many european countries
What we’re seeing at the moment is a mere drop in the ocean, a barely discernible pinprick, compared to how bad migration is going to get in 20-30 years time due to climate change.
Those on the move could number in the hundreds of millions.
I think it's touching that this whole sub-thread of discussion assumes that desperate people in search of food, forced to search for refuge after experiencing repeated climate-induced crop-failures, will be making their way to Britain, a country that has been reliant on food imports for centuries, but that is steadily losing the ability to pay for imports.
There's a real risk of increasing numbers of poorer Britons being priced out of meat protein by growing demand on the global market from China. And it's the sort of problem that will only deteriorate as the economy continues to stagnate.
Yes, and, on top of that, large areas of our most productive farmland will be at increasing risk of inundation as the sea level rises. Albeit on the century rather than the decade time scale.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It's the real world. Companies want to hire people who are good and listening to someone like you is part of the process.
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
Yeah that's a good point, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's given a recommendation.
It's just an odd position to be in as I'd never really considered the alternative that someone else who didn't get the helping hand could be pushed out of what is a really good job (£80-90k, 30 days leave plus bank holidays and remote/flexible working).
According to Wikipedia: "Today, the [Chinese] population continues to grow." And -- if you look at the big table -- declined about 1 million in 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China (As far as I can tell, the second is closer to being correct.)
I am not a demographer, much less one specializing in such difficult nations as China, but I think that the current estimates of China's population are probably accurate to within 10 million, but may not be accurate to within 1 million.
Just seen a round-up of Michelle Donellan doing the morning press round really struggling on small boats and knighthood for Stanley. At one point she said "I'm not the immigration minister, I'm the SofS for Education. At least the interviewer was kind enough not to say "I know, unbelievable isn't it?"
At least she wasn't asked why her department continues to employ a chief of OFSTED who literally doesn't know what safeguarding is.
I encountered, in my early days in the city, a derivatives trader who was unaware that
- the pricing systems used the Bank of England base rate as a parameter - the Bank of England base rate had changed yesterday
He was therefore somewhat surprised that all the pricing numbers had changed. And rang me to complain.
For context - this is similar to a fisherman being unaware that water is wet.
Water is only 'wet' between 0 degrees C and 100 degrees C, at normal pressures.
Discuss.
Is steam not wet? I think it's at least moist.
Interesting. Maybe not until it cools down on you?
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
No you weren’t
By definition of the company hires her they decided she was the best candidate for the job. There’s not some kind of fixed number of candidate who are taken forward to interview
The mistake your cousin is making is muddling up process with purpose.
The purpose of a CV screen is to ensure that all suitable candidates are interviewed. You made sure a suitable candidate was interviewed just via a different route
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
The power of patronage used to be big in medicine, but has been seen off by national interviews and appointments that no one can manipulate.
Do we have better appointments or just a bunch of clones who have scored the same points at interview?
While obviously there is a downside to patronage, and it could be blatantly discriminatory, being an effective patron whose opinion mattered could only be sustained if the patron helps out good people. Push too many duffers and people ignore your calls.
By getting someone onto the shortlist by patronage and pulling strings, paradoxically you may be aiding real diversity as it would be someone from outside their expected range, albeit pulled from a small clique.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
So you expect the old bill to check every road and nook and cranny.. impossible People go.missing all the time...they might have been at a party....
Don’t know the full circumstances, and I am sure there will be extenuating circumstances, but sometimes people don’t pick up when something might be wrong. Like my runner friend who took 7 GP visits to convince the GP to refer him on, whereupon a heart condition was discovered. It’s probable that the folk in the crash were not those to go missing without texting or contact, so families would be desperate.
I like the story of a chap I met, who went back to the hospital with his X rays (from a private treatment), and demanded to see the senior consultant.
When asked if he was going to sue, he said no - "I want you to get your doctor in and show him what a cracked vertebra looks like on an X-Ray. So he won't miss it next time."
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
So you expect the old bill to check every road and nook and cranny.. impossible People go.missing all the time...they might have been at a party....
Presumably the police could have checked where their phones were.
People go missing, yes, but this was a whole car full disappearing without trace.
Quite. It’s not 1978. We have so much ability to track things (cars, via ANPR, phones etc). A few quick checks would have helped. No idea if any of the three who died might have lived if found sooner, but that will haunt the families and probably the plod too now.
There are two still alive I believe. Lying critically ill for two days. Could the others have survived? What I can't understand is how it took so long to find them. It's a very busy road.
As for the police more generally we need to be told why they are no longer able to investigate burglaries etc. If they don't have the resources then fine. But where are their resources going? What's changed?
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It's the real world. Companies want to hire people who are good and listening to someone like you is part of the process.
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
Yeah that's a good point, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's given a recommendation.
It's just an odd position to be in as I'd never really considered the alternative that someone else who didn't get the helping hand could be pushed out of what is a really good job (£80-90k, 30 days leave plus bank holidays and remote/flexible working).
Presumably for that money they've got to be very good. It can be easy to fall into the trap of thinking that all you have to do is to make it to that level and you're set for life (an understandable view if you've worked in the public sector...). But a job with that sort of money is likely to have a lot of responsibility.
Just seen a round-up of Michelle Donellan doing the morning press round really struggling on small boats and knighthood for Stanley. At one point she said "I'm not the immigration minister, I'm the SofS for Education. At least the interviewer was kind enough not to say "I know, unbelievable isn't it?"
At least she wasn't asked why her department continues to employ a chief of OFSTED who literally doesn't know what safeguarding is.
I encountered, in my early days in the city, a derivatives trader who was unaware that
- the pricing systems used the Bank of England base rate as a parameter - the Bank of England base rate had changed yesterday
He was therefore somewhat surprised that all the pricing numbers had changed. And rang me to complain.
For context - this is similar to a fisherman being unaware that water is wet.
Water is only 'wet' between 0 degrees C and 100 degrees C, at normal pressures.
Discuss.
Is steam not wet? I think it's at least moist.
Interesting. Maybe not until it cools down on you?
As for the police more generally we need to be told why they are no longer able to investigate burglaries etc. If they don't have the resources then fine. But where are their resources going? What's changed?
I was driving along a narrowish country road yesterday, and was nearly struck by an oncoming vehicle traveling at high speed on a corner and veering into my lane.
I served out of the way, and then found out they were running away from 8 police cars chasing them, blues and twos all the way.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It's the real world. Companies want to hire people who are good and listening to someone like you is part of the process.
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
Yeah that's a good point, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's given a recommendation.
It's just an odd position to be in as I'd never really considered the alternative that someone else who didn't get the helping hand could be pushed out of what is a really good job (£80-90k, 30 days leave plus bank holidays and remote/flexible working).
Presumably for that money they've got to be very good. It can be easy to fall into the trap of thinking that all you have to do is to make it to that level and you're set for life (an understandable view if you've worked in the public sector...). But a job with that sort of money is likely to have a lot of responsibility.
No it's a senior product manager role at a tech startup and the reason I think she's a good role fit is because she's not like that at all. She left the public sector a few years ago because she got frustrated at the lack of direction and change in the NHS (where she worked). The person who gets this job is likely to be in a six figure head of product or VP of product role within 5 years at a different startup.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
So you expect the old bill to check every road and nook and cranny.. impossible People go.missing all the time...they might have been at a party....
Presumably the police could have checked where their phones were.
People go missing, yes, but this was a whole car full disappearing without trace.
Quite. It’s not 1978. We have so much ability to track things (cars, via ANPR, phones etc). A few quick checks would have helped. No idea if any of the three who died might have lived if found sooner, but that will haunt the families and probably the plod too now.
There are two still alive I believe. Lying critically ill for two days. Could the others have survived? What I can't understand is how it took so long to find them. It's a very busy road.
As for the police more generally we need to be told why they are no longer able to investigate burglaries etc. If they don't have the resources then fine. But where are their resources going? What's changed?
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Most big companies these days have AI scan the CV before it ever reaches a human. If "computer says no" due to there not being enough relevant keywords, the CV gets binned without a real human being ever figuring out if the person has the kind of transferable skills or the right attitude that would enable them to succeed at the job.
Helping someone past that initial stage and into a competitive interview where they have the chance to prove themselves on their own merit isn't wrong at all. Ultimately, you're not hiring them - just vouching for someone and saying "I reckon this person is worth giving a chance". Which is how 99% of people end up in jobs anyway...
I don't know anything about tech companies. But I think that any company that is recruiting like this (sifting through thousands of CV's for a senior level position) is doing so in a very inefficient way. I find it very confusing that any company would do this. Wouldn't it make more sense to get a headhunter to find candidates for this type of role? I would have thought that all that is going on here is similar to what a headhunter might do, sending through details of a candidate that may be suitable.
It isn't nepotism, to me that is when a job is created or handed out as a favour, to suit some other agenda. I saw this in my first private sector job, there were a handful of posts that were just there for family members of the owners associates.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
So you expect the old bill to check every road and nook and cranny.. impossible People go.missing all the time...they might have been at a party....
Presumably the police could have checked where their phones were.
People go missing, yes, but this was a whole car full disappearing without trace.
Quite. It’s not 1978. We have so much ability to track things (cars, via ANPR, phones etc). A few quick checks would have helped. No idea if any of the three who died might have lived if found sooner, but that will haunt the families and probably the plod too now.
There are two still alive I believe. Lying critically ill for two days. Could the others have survived? What I can't understand is how it took so long to find them. It's a very busy road.
As for the police more generally we need to be told why they are no longer able to investigate burglaries etc. If they don't have the resources then fine. But where are their resources going? What's changed?
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Most big companies these days have AI scan the CV before it ever reaches a human. If "computer says no" due to there not being enough relevant keywords, the CV gets binned without a real human being ever figuring out if the person has the kind of transferable skills or the right attitude that would enable them to succeed at the job.
Helping someone past that initial stage and into a competitive interview where they have the chance to prove themselves on their own merit isn't wrong at all. Ultimately, you're not hiring them - just vouching for someone and saying "I reckon this person is worth giving a chance". Which is how 99% of people end up in jobs anyway...
I don't know anything about tech companies. But I think that any company that is recruiting like this (sifting through thousands of CV's for a senior level position) is doing so in a very inefficient way. I find it very confusing that any company would do this. Wouldn't it make more sense to get a headhunter to find candidates for this type of role? I would have thought that all that is going on here is similar to what a headhunter might do, sending through details of a candidate that may be suitable.
It isn't nepotism, to me that is when a job is created or handed out as a favour, to suit some other agenda. I saw this in my first private sector job, there were a handful of posts that were just there for family members of the owners associates.
Headhunters are expensive, CV screeners are cheap but they definitely preclude a lot of good talent.
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’ Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
So you expect the old bill to check every road and nook and cranny.. impossible People go.missing all the time...they might have been at a party....
Presumably the police could have checked where their phones were.
People go missing, yes, but this was a whole car full disappearing without trace.
Quite. It’s not 1978. We have so much ability to track things (cars, via ANPR, phones etc). A few quick checks would have helped. No idea if any of the three who died might have lived if found sooner, but that will haunt the families and probably the plod too now.
There are two still alive I believe. Lying critically ill for two days. Could the others have survived? What I can't understand is how it took so long to find them. It's a very busy road.
As for the police more generally we need to be told why they are no longer able to investigate burglaries etc. If they don't have the resources then fine. But where are their resources going? What's changed?
I am just astonished that a sensible and intelligent poster is actually saying that he believes that a two state solution is racist.
A two state solution is not racist.
Hamas proclaim a one-state solution, with Israel to be exterminated. Is that racist?
Yes. But Hamas is not representing the point of view which most of us hold.
"Most of us" on PB? Perhaps not. Plenty of Palestinians, yes. I mean they are the government of Gaza, after all.
Then by your logic Israel as a state is racist because the current Government is and so the Jewish cause is racist.
Yes Toppings logic totally flawed.
LOL we have a Jeremy Corbyn supporter to set us right. A supporter of that well-known anti-semite Jeremy Corbyn.
Welcome the analysis.
Good way to lose an argument.
"Life long anti racists being called racists by racists"
I think Alexei is spot on
“It's absurd to see people who have spent a lifetime standing against racism, being accused of racism, by racists.” ― Alexei Sayle.
Except that's bollocks if the people standing up have had a blindspot. And its plenty of non racists who make the accusations. Do they think only klansmen have made accusations or something?
These activists appear to think if they label themselves anti racists than makes it impossible to be racist. It ain't. At best some if these terrific anti racists seem very bad at spotting crushingly unsubtle racist tropes.
There is (antisemitic) racism on the pro-Palestine Left. It's my 'side' but I know this is true. It's also true that on the pro-Israel Right there is plenty of (white supremacy) racism. The racism on the Left is driven by being pro-Palestine, whereas on the Right their being pro-Israel is driven by their racism. It's all bad news obviously.
The racism on the Left is driven by anti Jewish feeling not pro Palestinian.
If the concern was for Palestine, where was that concern when the land was annexed by Jordan and Egypt?
Jordan and Egypt quite literally wiped Palestine off the map, not Israel. But who gets the hatred?
By anti ISRAEL feeling. Israel being viewed as a racist oppressor in cahoots with western colonialism in general and the US in particular. From there you equate Israel with Jewishness, and you're on your way to the dark side. If you keep them separate, you should be ok.
Better still, separate the Israeli Government from Israelis and Jewish people both.
Yes. The government is not the country. Thank god (2016/22).
It is increasingly the case though that the Israeli population is becoming hard right, due to reduced liberal American Jewish immigration and divergent birth rates.
Well in a democracy you don't get a hard right racist government by pure accident. But there's lots of internal opposition to it - and also external (amongst jews) opposition to it. So you do have to separate the policies and rhetoric of the Israeli government from jewish people, both as a whole and individually. Otherwise you'll fall into antisemitism, it's just a matter of to what degree. A respectable position (imo) is to support Israel's right to prosper in peace, now and forever, and at the same time recognize that the crimes being perpetrated (by it) against the Palestinians need to stop for this to happen.
Wow, what a remarkable and nasty piece of victim blaming. Do women have to stop wearing short skirts in order to not get raped too in your eyes?
A respectable position is to support Israels right to prosper in peace, now and forever. No ifs, no buts and no equivocation.
A respectable position is also that a new state called Palestine should be created from some of the land that Egypt and Jordan ceded when they tried to wipe out Israel in 1967.
What proportion of the land that Egypt and Jordan ceded becomes a new state called Palestine, and what proportion becomes part of Israel's territory needs to be negotiated. But those negotiations do not impede Israels right to peaceful existence, a peaceful existence that if it had been respected would mean that land would still be Egyptian and Jordanian.
Israel's oppressive treatment of the Palestinians is like a woman wearing a short skirt?
My heart goes out to you. That is quite excruciating to read - so I dread to think what it was like to write.
What oppressive treatment of the Palestinians?
It seems the main thing that's been discussed today as supposed wrongdoing by Israel is the Settlements.
However the Oslo Accords did not forbid Israel from building new Settlements. It in fact explicitly stated that the status of settlements and the borders were for future negotiations.
Until those negotiations are finished and a new border is agreed, Israel is perfectly entitled and within its rights to build settlements and seek to negotiate that as being its land in the final status negotiations.
So now Israel ISN'T oppressing the Palestinians? That's great. Lead story on the news tonight then, I'd have thought. I'll be sure to tune in.
No, Israel isn't oppressing the Palestinians.
No need for a negative to be on the news, it'd be on the news if they were actually doing so.
Just seen a round-up of Michelle Donellan doing the morning press round really struggling on small boats and knighthood for Stanley. At one point she said "I'm not the immigration minister, I'm the SofS for Education. At least the interviewer was kind enough not to say "I know, unbelievable isn't it?"
At least she wasn't asked why her department continues to employ a chief of OFSTED who literally doesn't know what safeguarding is.
I encountered, in my early days in the city, a derivatives trader who was unaware that
- the pricing systems used the Bank of England base rate as a parameter - the Bank of England base rate had changed yesterday
He was therefore somewhat surprised that all the pricing numbers had changed. And rang me to complain.
For context - this is similar to a fisherman being unaware that water is wet.
Water is only 'wet' between 0 degrees C and 100 degrees C, at normal pressures.
Discuss.
Is steam not wet? I think it's at least moist.
Interesting. Maybe not until it cools down on you?
Even liquid water is not technically wet when solely in contact with a hydrophobic material.
Just to finish off on Estonia, a significant victory for the liberal Reform Party, winning 37 seats in the Riigikogu. A real setback for the conservative EKRE who lost seats and vote share and a disaster for Centre, another liberal party but one whose more pro-Russian sentiments went down like a lump of cold sick in the current climate.
In its place came another liberal party, E200, which picked up 14 seats in the new Riigikogu.
Reform and E200 can in fact govern with a small majority but it seems likely they will be joined by the Social Democrats.
Over here and a week after Sunak's triumph in Northern Ireland, we have a Redfield & Wilton poll showing the 27-point Labour lead having slumped, tanked or crashed to just 26 points. It seems whatever poll move there may have been early last week to the Conservatives, it's not been sustained.
To be fair, Government approval numbers and favourability numbers for Sunak have improved and in the Starmer vs Sunak preferred Prime Minister polling, last week's 41-32 is this week's 41-35 so a small but clear improvement.
Better news also in that 5% of the 209 Conservative GE vote would once again vote Conservative - 19% will switch to Labour and let's not forget if 45% nationally voted Conservative last time, a fifth of that is 9% of the overall electorate. 15% are Don't Knows and 10% will bck Reform.
Looking at the England sub-sample, Labour leads 52-26, a swing of 20.5% from the 2019 election. That suggests Sevenoaks, the 295th most marginal Conservative seat, would be lost leaving a rump Conservative parliamentary party of round 80-00 seats.
I'd actually argue, however, this is a better poll for the Government than last week's albeit the headline VI has hardly moved at all - the underlying and supplementary data is better though that's damning with faint phrase to some extent.
If those preferred PM figures end up more accurate on voting intention than the headline figures it would switch from a Labour landslide to a hung parliament
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It's the real world. Companies want to hire people who are good and listening to someone like you is part of the process.
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
Yeah that's a good point, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's given a recommendation.
It's just an odd position to be in as I'd never really considered the alternative that someone else who didn't get the helping hand could be pushed out of what is a really good job (£80-90k, 30 days leave plus bank holidays and remote/flexible working).
Presumably for that money they've got to be very good. It can be easy to fall into the trap of thinking that all you have to do is to make it to that level and you're set for life (an understandable view if you've worked in the public sector...). But a job with that sort of money is likely to have a lot of responsibility.
No it's a senior product manager role at a tech startup and the reason I think she's a good role fit is because she's not like that at all. She left the public sector a few years ago because she got frustrated at the lack of direction and change in the NHS (where she worked). The person who gets this job is likely to be in a six figure head of product or VP of product role within 5 years at a different startup.
Personally I think it's OK as long as you don't have enough pull to get her the job. If she's not right for the role, or there are better candidates, it will come out in the process. If she got the whole job on your say so I'd find it a little more annoying, because she could have serious flaws that would not be apparent to someone who only knew her socially (however well), and that wouldn't be fair on her prospective colleagues.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
I don't think it was wrong. In most countries they would be amazed that anyone was making anything of this.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It's the real world. Companies want to hire people who are good and listening to someone like you is part of the process.
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
Yeah that's a good point, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's given a recommendation.
It's just an odd position to be in as I'd never really considered the alternative that someone else who didn't get the helping hand could be pushed out of what is a really good job (£80-90k, 30 days leave plus bank holidays and remote/flexible working).
Presumably for that money they've got to be very good. It can be easy to fall into the trap of thinking that all you have to do is to make it to that level and you're set for life (an understandable view if you've worked in the public sector...). But a job with that sort of money is likely to have a lot of responsibility.
No it's a senior product manager role at a tech startup and the reason I think she's a good role fit is because she's not like that at all. She left the public sector a few years ago because she got frustrated at the lack of direction and change in the NHS (where she worked). The person who gets this job is likely to be in a six figure head of product or VP of product role within 5 years at a different startup.
Personally I think it's OK as long as you don't have enough pull to get her the job. If she's not right for the role, or there are better candidates, it will come out in the process. If she got the whole job on your say so I'd find it a little more annoying, because she could have serious flaws that would not be apparent to someone who only knew her socially (however well), and that wouldn't be fair on her prospective colleagues.
It's not my company and I'm not the hiring manager so no chance of that!
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Recruitment is very difficult because it takes time to build relationships and you can never be sure that someone will work out. The person you were most doing a favour for is your ex-colleague. They trust you, you trust your best mate's wife - that's an invaluable chain of trust that won't exist for any other candidate.
It isn't really fair, but meritocracy as an organising principle for society is a con. If they didn't have this chain of trust to help make the decision the chances are they would be using a bunch of stereotypes and other cognitive shortcuts instead, and they're definitely worse.
Essentially upgraded tech leads to more misidentification of things. Not a surprise. Early radar had the same issues.
Keep waiting for the big UAP reveal boys, it’s coming…*
*Just after commercial nuclear fusion. Maybe.**
**I think commercial fusion 100x more likely.
Have any physicists commented on the physics-defying abilities of UAP?
The point of my post being the UAPs are not defying physics. They are glitches and misidentification, notably with newer more sensitive kit.
Sure, I get that, but my point is that the people so far saying that they defy physics, it's less interesting if none of them are physicists. But why not have a physicist look at it, if they're taking it seriously?
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It's the real world. Companies want to hire people who are good and listening to someone like you is part of the process.
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
Yeah that's a good point, I'm sure I'm not the only person who's given a recommendation.
It's just an odd position to be in as I'd never really considered the alternative that someone else who didn't get the helping hand could be pushed out of what is a really good job (£80-90k, 30 days leave plus bank holidays and remote/flexible working).
Presumably for that money they've got to be very good. It can be easy to fall into the trap of thinking that all you have to do is to make it to that level and you're set for life (an understandable view if you've worked in the public sector...). But a job with that sort of money is likely to have a lot of responsibility.
No it's a senior product manager role at a tech startup and the reason I think she's a good role fit is because she's not like that at all. She left the public sector a few years ago because she got frustrated at the lack of direction and change in the NHS (where she worked). The person who gets this job is likely to be in a six figure head of product or VP of product role within 5 years at a different startup.
Yeah, it happens, it's fine. But there's a bit of small print that those of us who have got lucky and aren't Gen Z need to remember.
Remember how "meritocracy" was originally a term of abuse? The idea was that people who thought they had got to the top by their own brilliance and effort were liable to be arses about it. Whereas your traditional aristo knew that it was all a flukey accident of birth and wealth came with a degree of responsibility for those who were less lucky.
It's rubbish being young right now, because oldsters give the impression of having everything sewn up. Jobs and networks are a small (very small) part of that, especially if you're excluded from them. And even without lockdown, this sort of thing is a massive issue if you grow up in the sticks.
So hold gently onto the fruits of good fortune, because another version of you didn't get them. Allocation of the best jobs to not-necessarily the best people is probably inevitable, but exponential rewards flowing from that probably aren't. And part of the historic understanding of Conservatism is to do enough to stop revolution. I'm not sure the current elite have internalised that lesson.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Most big companies these days have AI scan the CV before it ever reaches a human. If "computer says no" due to there not being enough relevant keywords, the CV gets binned without a real human being ever figuring out if the person has the kind of transferable skills or the right attitude that would enable them to succeed at the job.
Helping someone past that initial stage and into a competitive interview where they have the chance to prove themselves on their own merit isn't wrong at all. Ultimately, you're not hiring them - just vouching for someone and saying "I reckon this person is worth giving a chance". Which is how 99% of people end up in jobs anyway...
I don't know anything about tech companies. But I think that any company that is recruiting like this (sifting through thousands of CV's for a senior level position) is doing so in a very inefficient way. I find it very confusing that any company would do this. Wouldn't it make more sense to get a headhunter to find candidates for this type of role? I would have thought that all that is going on here is similar to what a headhunter might do, sending through details of a candidate that may be suitable.
It isn't nepotism, to me that is when a job is created or handed out as a favour, to suit some other agenda. I saw this in my first private sector job, there were a handful of posts that were just there for family members of the owners associates.
Headhunters are expensive, CV screeners are cheap but they definitely preclude a lot of good talent.
In my own industry i'd say it is nearly all headhunting, be this formally through a headhunter or informally through professional networks. The exception is permanent public sector jobs that have to be done by a rational form filling exercise way which is an enormous burden for everyone involved - everyone is continuously trying to find ways of circumventing it. I've never known a CV screening process to be used.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Recruitment is very difficult because it takes time to build relationships and you can never be sure that someone will work out. The person you were most doing a favour for is your ex-colleague. They trust you, you trust your best mate's wife - that's an invaluable chain of trust that won't exist for any other candidate.
It isn't really fair, but meritocracy as an organising principle for society is a con. If they didn't have this chain of trust to help make the decision the chances are they would be using a bunch of stereotypes and other cognitive shortcuts instead, and they're definitely worse.
The other thing to bear in mind is that, if they appoint her, and it goes wrong, you also lose out, because your ex-colleague loses a bit of trust in you and the quality of your judgement. So there are consequences for you.
In a nepotistic situation that is rarely the case. When the boss of a firm hires their unqualified favourite nephew for a job, the only consequence they suffer is from the damage to morale among those of their employees who have to make up the difference.
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
It ain’t what you know, it’s who you know. ‘‘Twas ever thus and forever will be.
I'd like to see the the population ratio of India to China for people under 30. I presume it isn't even close. Which is likely to be the larger economy in 2100?
Hmm, I got a telling off from a Gen Z cousin of mine because I helped my best mate's wife get an interview for a high level position at a tech startup where one of my ex-colleagues is director level. She's a perfect fit for the role so all I did was ensure she got past the CV screen (as she doesn't have role specific experience but very similar) and now it's up to her but my cousin thinks it's unfair and similar to nepotism because I've given someone a helping hand to get a job for which she wouldn't otherwise be eligible.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Most big companies these days have AI scan the CV before it ever reaches a human. If "computer says no" due to there not being enough relevant keywords, the CV gets binned without a real human being ever figuring out if the person has the kind of transferable skills or the right attitude that would enable them to succeed at the job.
Helping someone past that initial stage and into a competitive interview where they have the chance to prove themselves on their own merit isn't wrong at all. Ultimately, you're not hiring them - just vouching for someone and saying "I reckon this person is worth giving a chance". Which is how 99% of people end up in jobs anyway...
The answer to companies too lazy to employ humans to scan CVs is to add the "keywords" (even if fictitious) in white text on a white background. The computer will find them, but a human won't. Well, this is what a friend told me, honest.
I'd like to see the the population ratio of India to China for people under 30. I presume it isn't even close. Which is likely to be the larger economy in 2100?
A lot of countries are projected to see their populations nearly halve by the end of the century - including China. It will be a massive change that may well have a greater effect on the world than most of the things contemporary society talks about.
How does capitalism - a system of economic organisation that is predicated on growth and expansion - cope with a declining global population?
I'd like to see the the population ratio of India to China for people under 30. I presume it isn't even close. Which is likely to be the larger economy in 2100?
A lot of countries are projected to see their populations nearly halve by the end of the century - including China. It will be a massive change that may well have a greater effect on the world than most of the things contemporary society talks about.
How does capitalism - a system of economic organisation that is predicated on growth and expansion - cope with a declining global population?
I think we talk too much about 'capitalism'. The core concern for me is how people respond to reduced living standards. My understanding of the research is that whatever level of income someone has they don't respond well to getting poorer.
I'd like to see the the population ratio of India to China for people under 30. I presume it isn't even close. Which is likely to be the larger economy in 2100?
A lot of countries are projected to see their populations nearly halve by the end of the century - including China. It will be a massive change that may well have a greater effect on the world than most of the things contemporary society talks about.
How does capitalism - a system of economic organisation that is predicated on growth and expansion - cope with a declining global population?
Its a Ponzi Scheme. At some point it will all come crashing down.
I'd like to see the the population ratio of India to China for people under 30. I presume it isn't even close. Which is likely to be the larger economy in 2100?
India quite possibly, China like the West will still likely be well ahead on gdp per capita though
Ash Regan wants to "look into" ensuring people in the Borders can watch STV rather than ITV because she believes there may be a correlation between watching ITV Border and voting patterns (ie electing Tories), she tells the SNP's SNP hustings in Dumfries.
"Matt Hancock’s treasure trove of messages gives us insight into one of the great Walter Mittys of our age, a man so out of his depth he must have occasionally got the bends."
Ash Regan wants to "look into" ensuring people in the Borders can watch STV rather than ITV because she believes there may be a correlation between watching ITV Border and voting patterns (ie electing Tories), she tells the SNP's SNP hustings in Dumfries.
Ash Regan wants to "look into" ensuring people in the Borders can watch STV rather than ITV because she believes there may be a correlation between watching ITV Border and voting patterns (ie electing Tories), she tells the SNP's SNP hustings in Dumfries.
Ash Regan wants to "look into" ensuring people in the Borders can watch STV rather than ITV because she believes there may be a correlation between watching ITV Border and voting patterns (ie electing Tories), she tells the SNP's SNP hustings in Dumfries.
I doubt that either ITV Border or STV will be impressed with that suggestion, how does Ash Regan explain voting patterns in Moray, Banff and Buchan and West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine?
Now we shall smoke out who the traitors really are.
If Labour oppose this, so the legislation isn’t in force by summer as Government claim it can be, it puts game playing Labour so clearly on side of people smugglers, murderers, gangsters, scroungers, cheats - and so transparently the party of massive, unfettered immigration, not on the side of the hard working working class of this great proud nation.
If you, ordinary, honest, UK voter tolerate Labour game playing on this clamp down on illegal gangs, gangsters, drugs and all sorts of crime, then your children will be next. And don’t the voters already know this BECAUSE As todays poll proved, even vast amounts of Labour and Lib Dems voters are behind Braverman on this one, and at least one Red Wall Labour member is on PB posting “go careful on this North London hand ringing Labour.” It’s so clear which party must tread careful, is it not?
Though on the other hand it’s got to be said, Sunak doesn’t have a workable policy, the idea isn’t even new it’s rehash of what was done last year and year before, and this time isn’t even spiced up with ECHR withdrawal which at least gave it a serious flavour of actually doing something against the legal challenges and blocks still grounding the rendition flights. Swathes of his own side are publicly warning “you are over promising on what you can’t deliver, you inexperienced twat”. It will be interesting how many Conservatives would fail to back it if allowed a vote, either because they fear it sails too close to the heat of the Nasty Party so their wings will melt,too expensive to commit to, too ridiculous and unworkable, or even doesn’t go far enough if still staying in to be thwarted by ECHR.
To think Braverman was sacked by Truss for conspiring with the backbenches to get this policy, and people still choose to believe Sunak is so much better than Truss and can do no wrong. Are you one of those yourself?
Ash Regan wants to "look into" ensuring people in the Borders can watch STV rather than ITV because she believes there may be a correlation between watching ITV Border and voting patterns (ie electing Tories), she tells the SNP's SNP hustings in Dumfries.
I doubt that either ITV Border or STV will be impressed with that suggestion, how does Ash Regan explain voting patterns in Moray, Banff and Buchan and West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine?
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere near the financial support yet, and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere neat the financial support yet and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
I think Pence will get a shock win in evangelical heavy Iowa and then also win South Carolina, De Santis will win New Hampshire and Florida. Trump will win Michigan but soon have no path to the nomination, drop out and out of fury with DeSantis bury the hatchet with Pence and endorse his former VP.
Pence then wins the nomination but the Biden-Buttigieg ticket (Harris going to the SC or State) beats him by a landslide. My very long shot prediction
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere neat the financial support yet and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
Polling says he is still miles ahead in supporters. It’s hard to imagine that support switching to another candidate, over what exactly will they choose to do that?
Even if there are hatchet jobs, will they work? He fights very aggressively.
From a die hard GOP supporter view, was the Donald presidency all that bad? He ticks off a few positives for them, like winning and beating the Dems. Gerrymandering the Supreme Court and over turning roe v Wade. The appointment of another four and a half billion arch Conservative judges. Pulling the centre of gravity of GOP to the right. Standing up for American Jobs and American Workers, not outsourcing and factory closures. Kept America out of wars, and pulled them out from where they didn’t need to be. Tough on illegal immigration. Cut taxes.
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere neat the financial support yet and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
I think Pence will get a shock win in evangelical heavy Iowa and then also win South Carolina, De Santis will win New Hampshire and Florida. Trump will win Michigan but soon have no path to the nomination, drop out and out of fury with DeSantis bury the hatchet with Pence and endorse his former VP.
Pence then wins the nomination but the Biden-Buttigieg ticket (Harris going to the SC or State) beats him by a landslide. My very long shot prediction
That in turn suits Trump who being an ego maniac like Boris would be happy if their party is out of power for a generation if they aren't leading it. That way they can say 'told you so' being the last leaders of their party to win a national election
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere neat the financial support yet and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
Polling says he is still miles ahead in supporters. It’s hard to imagine that support switching to another candidate, over what exactly will they choose to do that?
Even if there are hatchet jobs, will they work? He fights very aggressively.
From a die hard GOP supporter view, was the Donald presidency all that bad? He ticks off a few positives for them, like winning and beating the Dems. Gerrymandering the Supreme Court and over turning roe v Wade. The appointment of another four and a half billion arch Conservative judges. Pulling the centre of gravity of GOP to the right. Standing up for American Jobs and American Workers, not outsourcing and factory closures. Kept America out of wars, and pulled them out from where they didn’t need to be. Tough on illegal immigration. Cut taxes.
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere near the financial support yet, and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
He does have the power to make any other nominee lose by running as an Independent so maybe the Republicans decide they have to go with a 20% chance of a win with DJT and 0% chance with anyone else. They still get government by and exclusively for rich old white men which is their primary objective.
Now we shall smoke out who the traitors really are.
I'm actually looking forward to Sir Dave's new TV series
The next series is being filmed in Sir Dave’s back garden!
“And here, we have, the humble, great British snail; sliming it’s way up this cabbage.” “Do you mind. I’m eating.” “Ob-serve, how quickly, this amazing feat of nature, can move, when it chooses too.” “Only to get away from you and your intrusive camera, you geriatric ****. Go pick on the pigeons.”
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere neat the financial support yet and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
Polling says he is still miles ahead in supporters. It’s hard to imagine that support switching to another candidate, over what exactly will they choose to do that?
Even if there are hatchet jobs, will they work? He fights very aggressively.
From a die hard GOP supporter view, was the Donald presidency all that bad? He ticks off a few positives for them, like winning and beating the Dems. Gerrymandering the Supreme Court and over turning roe v Wade. The appointment of another four and a half billion arch Conservative judges. Pulling the centre of gravity of GOP to the right. Standing up for American Jobs and American Workers, not outsourcing and factory closures. Kept America out of wars, and pulled them out from where they didn’t need to be. Tough on illegal immigration. Cut taxes.
But can he win the POTUS election?
Serious opposition candidates often save their money and keep powder dry when a sitting President is going for second term, as it’s supposed to favour the incumbent. Trump doesn’t have that luxury of time. But this has also got to be one of the most beatable 4 year presidents for a while as Mike keeps publishing headers saying large numbers of democrat voters don’t want Biden to stand, think he is now too old and dodgery. And that’s his own side, not even independents. I think it would be a tight rerun between the two of them, a bad election year for Biden, on jobs, economy, other missteps can easily hand the White House back to Trump.
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere neat the financial support yet and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
I think Pence will get a shock win in evangelical heavy Iowa and then also win South Carolina, De Santis will win New Hampshire and Florida. Trump will win Michigan but soon have no path to the nomination, drop out and out of fury with DeSantis bury the hatchet with Pence and endorse his former VP.
Pence then wins the nomination but the Biden-Buttigieg ticket (Harris going to the SC or State) beats him by a landslide. My very long shot prediction
That in turn suits Trump who being an ego maniac like Boris would be happy if their party is out of power for a generation if they aren't leading it. That way they can say 'told you so' being the last leaders of their party to win a national election
Wait. Weren’t you one of the last defenders of Boris before his debagging - pulled from waste pipe and shot moments before Boris was hauled out and apprehended
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere neat the financial support yet and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
I think Pence will get a shock win in evangelical heavy Iowa and then also win South Carolina, De Santis will win New Hampshire and Florida. Trump will win Michigan but soon have no path to the nomination, drop out and out of fury with DeSantis bury the hatchet with Pence and endorse his former VP.
Pence then wins the nomination but the Biden-Buttigieg ticket (Harris going to the SC or State) beats him by a landslide. My very long shot prediction
There is zero chance Pence wins the GOP nomination.
Farage and Steve Bannon shilling for Putin on GB News - If, god forbid, we one day end up at war with Russia hopefully we'll see Farage slung in jail as a traitor to the country - I'm increasingly of the view that Farage is utter scum!
Comments
"Cardiff car crash victims lay undiscovered for 46 hours after police told family to ‘stop ringing’
Case is referred to watchdog after mother of Sophie Russon, who was seriously injured, says officers ‘didn’t seem to care’"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/06/cardiff-car-crash-victims-lay-undiscovered-46-hours-police-told/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U226KDXA9Y
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1127087/#:~:text=Forty years ago China was,births were lost or postponed.
People go missing, yes, but this was a whole car full disappearing without trace.
Was I wrong to give out the helping hand? If my friend's wife gets the job then the company will have rated her as good candidate but at the same time I do see where my cousin is coming from, she (my cousin) doesn't have the same social or professional network that those of us in out 30s do and it might begin to feel like they are being blocked out of opportunities because they never got the chance to make the same level of connections with their colleagues as we did due to remote working post pandemic.
Helping someone past that initial stage and into a competitive interview where they have the chance to prove themselves on their own merit isn't wrong at all. Ultimately, you're not hiring them - just vouching for someone and saying "I reckon this person is worth giving a chance". Which is how 99% of people end up in jobs anyway...
I wonder if Starmer interviewed for the chief of staff position? Did he advertise for it? Or has he given it someone he's got a good idea about already?
It is the perception that between a bunch of laws ('uman rights is invoked a bit like Elf & Safety), nothing can be done. You just have to shut up and sit in a corner.
This is the worst possible method of setting a debate in a democratic country.
I've already commented on the nasty farce that is the removal of citizenship at the whim of the Home Sec. - this was created precisely because of the idea that there were people we couldn't try, couldn't send abroad to be tried, despite being criminals. I'm sure some legal theorists patted themselves on the back at the genius of how they defeated all those old fashioned treason laws. The reaction was utterly inevitable.
constitutions are made for men, not men for constitutions
2023 - "True" Tories esteem a Gold-Platted Turd (aka Boris Johnson MPxPM) as manifestation of national identity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
… In the second half of 1959, I took a long-distance bus from Xinyang to Luoshan and Gushi. Out of the window, I saw one corpse after another in the ditches. On the bus, no one dared to mention the dead. In one county, Guangshan, one-third of the people had died. Although there were dead people everywhere, the local leaders enjoyed good meals and fine liquor. ... I had seen people who had told the truth being destroyed. Did I dare to write it?..
It's just an odd position to be in as I'd never really considered the alternative that someone else who didn't get the helping hand could be pushed out of what is a really good job (£80-90k, 30 days leave plus bank holidays and remote/flexible working).
By definition of the company hires her they decided she was the best candidate for the job. There’s not some kind of fixed number of candidate who are taken forward to interview
The mistake your cousin is making is muddling up process with purpose.
The purpose of a CV screen is to ensure that all suitable candidates are interviewed. You made sure a suitable candidate was interviewed just via a different route
Do we have better appointments or just a bunch of clones who have scored the same points at interview?
While obviously there is a downside to patronage, and it could be blatantly discriminatory, being an effective patron whose opinion mattered could only be sustained if the patron helps out good people. Push too many duffers and people ignore your calls.
By getting someone onto the shortlist by patronage and pulling strings, paradoxically you may be aiding real diversity as it would be someone from outside their expected range, albeit pulled from a small clique.
When asked if he was going to sue, he said no - "I want you to get your doctor in and show him what a cracked vertebra looks like on an X-Ray. So he won't miss it next time."
As for the police more generally we need to be told why they are no longer able to investigate burglaries etc. If they don't have the resources then fine. But where are their resources going? What's changed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheated_steam#Saturated_steam
Name the last time that happened in politics...
I served out of the way, and then found out they were running away from 8 police cars chasing them, blues and twos all the way.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-nearly-half-way-to-recruiting-20000-more-officers
It isn't nepotism, to me that is when a job is created or handed out as a favour, to suit some other agenda. I saw this in my first private sector job, there were a handful of posts that were just there for family members of the owners associates.
No need for a negative to be on the news, it'd be on the news if they were actually doing so.
It isn't really fair, but meritocracy as an organising principle for society is a con. If they didn't have this chain of trust to help make the decision the chances are they would be using a bunch of stereotypes and other cognitive shortcuts instead, and they're definitely worse.
Remember how "meritocracy" was originally a term of abuse? The idea was that people who thought they had got to the top by their own brilliance and effort were liable to be arses about it. Whereas your traditional aristo knew that it was all a flukey accident of birth and wealth came with a degree of responsibility for those who were less lucky.
It's rubbish being young right now, because oldsters give the impression of having everything sewn up. Jobs and networks are a small (very small) part of that, especially if you're excluded from them. And even without lockdown, this sort of thing is a massive issue if you grow up in the sticks.
So hold gently onto the fruits of good fortune, because another version of you didn't get them. Allocation of the best jobs to not-necessarily the best people is probably inevitable, but exponential rewards flowing from that probably aren't. And part of the historic understanding of Conservatism is to do enough to stop revolution. I'm not sure the current elite have internalised that lesson.
In a nepotistic situation that is rarely the case. When the boss of a firm hires their unqualified favourite nephew for a job, the only consequence they suffer is from the damage to morale among those of their employees who have to make up the difference.
If the former, they are truly strange/disturbing.
Well, this is what a friend told me, honest.
How does capitalism - a system of economic organisation that is predicated on growth and expansion - cope with a declining global population?
Better than dismal rain or general dreechness.
Kids will be on the ceiling tomorrow, though...
https://twitter.com/Mike_Blackley/status/1632842893768392733?s=20
"Matt Hancock’s treasure trove of messages gives us insight into one of the great Walter Mittys of our age, a man so out of his depth he must have occasionally got the bends."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/06/matt-hancock-lockdown-champion-britain-deserved
https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1632846858266574849?s=20
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/05/sue-grays-appointment-unconstitutional-keir-starmer-should/
If Labour oppose this, so the legislation isn’t in force by summer as Government claim it can be, it puts game playing Labour so clearly on side of people smugglers, murderers, gangsters, scroungers, cheats - and so transparently the party of massive, unfettered immigration, not on the side of the hard working working class of this great proud nation.
If you, ordinary, honest, UK voter tolerate Labour game playing on this clamp down on illegal gangs, gangsters, drugs and all sorts of crime, then your children will be next. And don’t the voters already know this BECAUSE As todays poll proved, even vast amounts of Labour and Lib Dems voters are behind Braverman on this one, and at least one Red Wall Labour member is on PB posting “go careful on this North London hand ringing Labour.” It’s so clear which party must tread careful, is it not?
Though on the other hand it’s got to be said, Sunak doesn’t have a workable policy, the idea isn’t even new it’s rehash of what was done last year and year before, and this time isn’t even spiced up with ECHR withdrawal which at least gave it a serious flavour of actually doing something against the legal challenges and blocks still grounding the rendition flights. Swathes of his own side are publicly warning “you are over promising on what you can’t deliver, you inexperienced twat”. It will be interesting how many Conservatives would fail to back it if allowed a vote, either because they fear it sails too close to the heat of the Nasty Party so their wings will melt,too expensive to commit to, too ridiculous and unworkable, or even doesn’t go far enough if still staying in to be thwarted by ECHR.
To think Braverman was sacked by Truss for conspiring with the backbenches to get this policy, and people still choose to believe Sunak is so much better than Truss and can do no wrong. Are you one of those yourself?
Months ago I suggested that one thing was certain, you should bet against Trump. A bit down the the road, so far he doesnt have anywhere near the financial support yet, and there are signs of a hatchet job being done on him by the Republican party.
Does anyone have the view that he is going to win that nomination? If so, why?
Pence then wins the nomination but the Biden-Buttigieg ticket (Harris going to the SC or State) beats him by a landslide. My very long shot prediction
Even if there are hatchet jobs, will they work? He fights very aggressively.
From a die hard GOP supporter view, was the Donald presidency all that bad? He ticks off a few positives for them, like winning and beating the Dems. Gerrymandering the Supreme Court and over turning roe v Wade. The appointment of another four and a half billion arch Conservative judges. Pulling the centre of gravity of GOP to the right. Standing up for American Jobs and American Workers, not outsourcing and factory closures. Kept America out of wars, and pulled them out from where they didn’t need to be. Tough on illegal immigration. Cut taxes.
“And here, we have, the humble, great British snail; sliming it’s way up this cabbage.”
“Do you mind. I’m eating.”
“Ob-serve, how quickly, this amazing feat of nature, can move, when it chooses too.”
“Only to get away from you and your intrusive camera, you geriatric ****. Go pick on the pigeons.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPFJlNyhosU