Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Not our King? – politicalbetting.com

13567

Comments

  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,433

    Carnyx said:

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    THanks for that - very interesting. Food I had expected but not housing, not to that degree.
    Reportedly BTL landlords have increased rents to cover mortgage repayments as interest rates were raised in order to combat inflation, or something.
    The 3% rent cap in Scotland will obviously be going down like a cup of cold sick with the public. Well it will be once the media have finished with it.

    'Stampede of BTL landlords from the vital rentier sector!'
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522

    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    Well I’m 50 and I’m avoiding the coronation by going to France for the weekend, it’s nothing personal we did the same for Diana’s funeral.

    Ironically twin A will actually be there but we didn’t know that when we booked the flights.

    This is my plans for that weekend.

    The leader of Britain’s largest anti-monarchist group says more than 1,350 people have pledged to protest during the coronation parade in May.

    Graham Smith, the head of Republic, said the demonstration would mark “the largest protest action” in the group’s 50-year history.

    Republic activists will wear yellow T-shirts and wave yellow placards to create an “unmissable sea of yellow” along the procession route in central London, he said. When the newly crowned King passes in his gold stage coach, they plan to boo loudly and chant: “Not my King”.

    Most of the demonstration will be in Trafalgar Square but smaller groups of anti-monarchists will be dotted along other sections of the route.

    Smith, 48, said activists would aim to arrive early in the morning to be as close to the barriers as possible. He stressed, however, that they were not planning any Extinction Rebellion-style stunts, because “it’s not a good look” and “doesn’t help the cause”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anti-royal-monarchy-protest-coronation-not-my-king-krf5gf8gb
    The legal and constitutional inaccuracy of this slogan bothers me; it just isn't right unless you are a foreign citizen.

    "We don't want you as King!", Or "Republic Now!", would work, but this is a slogan for the ignorant or uneducated.
    It's another stupid American import to our culture, the same fools who kept saying "Not my president" about Trump.
    It is Boris who has taught us all the political power of the (inaccurate) three word slogan.
    Education, education, education.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,815

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    But if you are already in an overcrowded home, don't have another baby. Seems obvious.
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,276
    The tea towel is made from Cotton not Linen. Things on the wane at Fortnums, clearly.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,126
    Carnyx said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Carnyx said:

    FF43 said:

    eek said:

    Well I’m 50 and I’m avoiding the coronation by going to France for the weekend, it’s nothing personal we did the same for Diana’s funeral.

    Ironically twin A will actually be there but we didn’t know that when we booked the flights.

    We're also going away with flights massively cheaper on the Coronation day than the day before or after. So maybe everyone else is watching it
    Except the Red Arrows, of course. An expensive and increasingly disprop[ortionate element of the shrinking RAF. And I was reading that the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight have had to rejig their normally carefully calculated and rationed maintenance and flying programme because of the coronation.
    BBMF have no cause for complaint. They are one part of the RAF that is indulged with budget largesse and no questions asked. Their funding has quadrupled since 2010 to about 12m quid/year with 10 pilots and 40 odd ground crew. Operating 10 x WW2 aircraft is getting very expensive as the aircraft age and the sources of parts are drying up.
    Interesting. Especially when IIRC the FAA has basically handed over its equivalent to a charity and crossed fingers, I believe?
    The RN Historic Flight was disbanded in 2018. There is now a charitable trust which operates a few aircraft as funds permit with volunteer crew. Which should be the model for the BBMF (which also takes up a lot of valuable real estate at the 'Miramar of the Fens').
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,170

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    But if you are already in an overcrowded home, don't have another baby. Seems obvious.
    What else can you do when the telly breaks down?

  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,867

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,749
    edited April 2023

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    But if you are already in an overcrowded home, don't have another baby. Seems obvious.
    What else can you do when the telly breaks down?

    It turns out sex is fun. Why didn't @Leon tell us? Probably to increase demand for flint-knapped one-woman-operated dildos.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,333
    How's that Biden investigation going ?

    PAMELA BROWN: Have you found anything illegal while Biden was actually in office?

    JAMES COMER: We found a lot that should be illegal.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/atrupar/status/1648504068380434434
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,433

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    Look, I know you’re starving and homeless, but look on the bright side..
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,899
    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,867
    Sean_F said:

    On topic, I don’t admire Charles very much, and I think he’s a bit of a wet lettuce.

    It won’t stop me from enjoying the coronation, though.

    Nor will it alter my view that British Republicanism is like US socialism - silly cosplay that will never gain traction among the population.

    Nor me, although that quiche sounds quite disgusting.

    I can just see the cogs going off in Charles' head from ovee here: he mustn't include meat, lest it get criticised by the environmentalists or the vegans, so what can he fill it with?

    Oh, broad beans and spinach.

    Yuk.
  • Options
    Driver said:

    Why do we need a coronation? Charles is King. Charles is Head of State. Charles is already in role doing all of the constitutional things demanded of him. Bussing him up the Mall to have a crown plonked on his head does what? Specifically please.

    It winds up the republicans.
    I think I'm a republican these days but not a rabid one. I just find the whole thing bemusing. But thought the same when I saw the Lord Mayor's Parade in London, so...
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,242
    Driver said:

    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    Well I’m 50 and I’m avoiding the coronation by going to France for the weekend, it’s nothing personal we did the same for Diana’s funeral.

    Ironically twin A will actually be there but we didn’t know that when we booked the flights.

    This is my plans for that weekend.

    The leader of Britain’s largest anti-monarchist group says more than 1,350 people have pledged to protest during the coronation parade in May.

    Graham Smith, the head of Republic, said the demonstration would mark “the largest protest action” in the group’s 50-year history.

    Republic activists will wear yellow T-shirts and wave yellow placards to create an “unmissable sea of yellow” along the procession route in central London, he said. When the newly crowned King passes in his gold stage coach, they plan to boo loudly and chant: “Not my King”.

    Most of the demonstration will be in Trafalgar Square but smaller groups of anti-monarchists will be dotted along other sections of the route.

    Smith, 48, said activists would aim to arrive early in the morning to be as close to the barriers as possible. He stressed, however, that they were not planning any Extinction Rebellion-style stunts, because “it’s not a good look” and “doesn’t help the cause”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anti-royal-monarchy-protest-coronation-not-my-king-krf5gf8gb
    The legal and constitutional inaccuracy of this slogan bothers me; it just isn't right unless you are a foreign citizen.

    "We don't want you as King!", Or "Republic Now!", would work, but this is a slogan for the ignorant or uneducated.
    It's another stupid American import to our culture, the same fools who kept saying "Not my president" about Trump.
    It is Boris who has taught us all the political power of the (inaccurate) three word slogan.
    Education, education, education.
    To be fair that is only one word, albeit said three times.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    Producer price inputs and outputs are falling sharply, so that will feed through to the CPI.

    Not in food they're not!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,867

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    Look, I know you’re starving and homeless, but look on the bright side..
    Transport - another big area of cost - has inflation of virtually zero, and clothing and regular household goods are around 7-8%.

    If I was the BoE I wouldn't raise rates again, as there's enough evidence they are on a path to a sharp decline anyway, although I expect they are going to do so.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,601

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,751
    Two issue arise from the opinion split over monarchy and all that.

    The most significant is that even if support for the monarchy was only 20-30%, that would be easily enough to prevent any party that wanted to win a GE from putting a monarchy referendum in a manifesto. So short of a revolution or zeitgeist shift the monarchy stays.

    Secondly, the legislation involved would tie up the country for years, during which opinion would shift back to monarchy (think 1660) as people contemplate Presidents Jezza, Boris, Beckham, Farage, Little Mix and Blair.

    So in fact the question is what to do with it, not whether to have it.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,867

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    But if you are already in an overcrowded home, don't have another baby. Seems obvious.
    What else can you do when the telly breaks down?

    That's obvious.

    You tuck in to a heated debate on here about cash, Gary Lineker, Brexit or Venison.

    Much better than sex.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,242

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    Yes once you take out the two largest items in most households' budgets inflation only looks too high rather than way too high. 'Tis but a flesh wound!
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,543

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    I know I am very fortunate in life, I want everyone to have the opportunities I did, I just have worked out how to come up with a policy to do so.
    More important is that she gave birth at 53! Unless there is a mistake in the report...
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,242

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    But if you are already in an overcrowded home, don't have another baby. Seems obvious.
    What else can you do when the telly breaks down?

    That's obvious.

    You tuck in to a heated debate on here about cash, Gary Lineker, Brexit or Venison.

    Much better than sex.
    I'm only on here to prevent PB Tories reproducing.
  • Options
    ManOfGwentManOfGwent Posts: 23
    edited April 2023
    On topic, the Palace always worries these things will not go down well. QEII thought no one would turn up to her Diamond Jubilee on the Thames, but it seemed to bring in the crowds even in the rain.

    Those who are interested will be very interested as always, but I imagine the novelty of the event will bring in more viewers. London will be rammed, I know a few people going up for the weekend, even though they won't be able to see a thing other than on big screens.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,334
    Despite a typical thread header from ardent Republican TSE I don't think these numbers should worry the monarchy. About half the population will still watch or take part in celebrating the coronation guaranteeing it huge viewing figures still and it will also bring in lots of tourism.

    Remember too Charles and Camilla are most popular with their fellow pensioners, so no surprises that generation are the ones most interested in their coronation. William and Kate are popular across the generations though. Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,973
    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,242

    Dura_Ace said:

    Carnyx said:

    FF43 said:

    eek said:

    Well I’m 50 and I’m avoiding the coronation by going to France for the weekend, it’s nothing personal we did the same for Diana’s funeral.

    Ironically twin A will actually be there but we didn’t know that when we booked the flights.

    We're also going away with flights massively cheaper on the Coronation day than the day before or after. So maybe everyone else is watching it
    Except the Red Arrows, of course. An expensive and increasingly disprop[ortionate element of the shrinking RAF. And I was reading that the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight have had to rejig their normally carefully calculated and rationed maintenance and flying programme because of the coronation.
    BBMF have no cause for complaint. They are one part of the RAF that is indulged with budget largesse and no questions asked. Their funding has quadrupled since 2010 to about 12m quid/year with 10 pilots and 40 odd ground crew. Operating 10 x WW2 aircraft is getting very expensive as the aircraft age and the sources of parts are drying up.
    The Yanks seem to have no shortage of rich private individuals willing to throw millions, probably billions, at preserving their aeronautical heritage. Are our plutocrats just not patriotic enough (rhetorical question after looking at where many of them reside for tax purposes)?
    Mrs Thatcher was said to be surprised and disappointed that shovelling millions of pounds to yuppies did not increase charitable donations to American levels. Did they not understand her invoking the Good Samaritan? Did she not understand US tax write-offs?
    People have said that Thatcher wanted to create a world where people like her father would prosper, but ended up creating one where people like her son did.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,899
    The Murdoch Press, eh?


  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,177
    I certainly care as I'm getting an extra paid day off work.
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,342

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    Yes once you take out the two largest items in most households' budgets inflation only looks too high rather than way too high. 'Tis but a flesh wound!
    Look at it this way: for homeless alcoholic smokers who eat out of bins, inflation (for booze and fags) is only 5%!
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,601

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    This is essentially the route Sweden is taking, which seems to make sense.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,751
    HYUFD said:

    Despite a typical thread header from ardent Republican TSE I don't think these numbers should worry the monarchy. About half the population will still watch or take part in celebrating the coronation guaranteeing it huge viewing figures still and it will also bring in lots of tourism.

    Remember too Charles and Camilla are most popular with their fellow pensioners, so no surprises that generation are the ones most interested in their coronation. William and Kate are popular across the generations though. Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    The popularity of the monarchy can only be rationally measured by comparisons (with detail) with the alternatives.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Despite a typical thread header from ardent Republican TSE I don't think these numbers should worry the monarchy. About half the population will still watch or take part in celebrating the coronation guaranteeing it huge viewing figures still and it will also bring in lots of tourism.

    Remember too Charles and Camilla are most popular with their fellow pensioners, so no surprises that generation are the ones most interested in their coronation. William and Kate are popular across the generations though. Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Frankly it doesn't matter what "their fellow pensioners" think as they won't be around to be influenced. What my age and those 20-30s whippersnappers think is much more important.

    There is evidence that Charles understands the position he is in. Cutting back on the real absurdities (hereditary family coronation gowns???) and on the surplus to requirement hangers on is already happening. He will need to go further.

    William and Kate are popular? Vs the true King Harry and Queen Meghan, yes I grant you that. But beyond that? William appears to be a pompous bore, and his missus is pretty but otherwise vacant. They have cute kids. But people's attention spans have shortened and the variety of entertainment is now vast.

    I doubt that current generation of Wales's will be willing to perform for the cameras at the pace and intrusion needed to keep them as popular as you claim.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,126
    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
  • Options
    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,170
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,342
    algarkirk said:

    Two issue arise from the opinion split over monarchy and all that.

    The most significant is that even if support for the monarchy was only 20-30%, that would be easily enough to prevent any party that wanted to win a GE from putting a monarchy referendum in a manifesto. So short of a revolution or zeitgeist shift the monarchy stays.

    Secondly, the legislation involved would tie up the country for years, during which opinion would shift back to monarchy (think 1660) as people contemplate Presidents Jezza, Boris, Beckham, Farage, Little Mix and Blair.

    So in fact the question is what to do with it, not whether to have it.

    I agree that it is probably more hassle than it is worth to change.

    But, please have a look at comparable countries with non-executive presidents and tell me President Blair would be likely. (Apart from the fact that nobody would want it - probably not even Blair himself). This straw man type argument is pretty tedious.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,126

    HYUFD said:

    Despite a typical thread header from ardent Republican TSE I don't think these numbers should worry the monarchy. About half the population will still watch or take part in celebrating the coronation guaranteeing it huge viewing figures still and it will also bring in lots of tourism.

    Remember too Charles and Camilla are most popular with their fellow pensioners, so no surprises that generation are the ones most interested in their coronation. William and Kate are popular across the generations though. Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Frankly it doesn't matter what "their fellow pensioners" think as they won't be around to be influenced. What my age and those 20-30s whippersnappers think is much more important.

    There is evidence that Charles understands the position he is in. Cutting back on the real absurdities (hereditary family coronation gowns???) and on the surplus to requirement hangers on is already happening. He will need to go further.

    William and Kate are popular? Vs the true King Harry and Queen Meghan, yes I grant you that. But beyond that? William appears to be a pompous bore, and his missus is pretty but otherwise vacant. They have cute kids. But people's attention spans have shortened and the variety of entertainment is now vast.

    George looks like a podgy little psycho that you wouldn't leave unattended with small animals.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,177
    Sean_F said:

    Producer price inputs and outputs are falling sharply, so that will feed through to the CPI.

    Producer input prices rose by 7.6% in the year to March 2023, down from 12.8% in the year to February 2023.

    Producer output (factory gate) prices rose by 8.7% in the year to March 2023, down from 11.9% in the year to February 2023.

    While annual inflation rates have been falling in recent months, the index levels for both input and output prices have been broadly stable since June 2022.


    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/producerpriceinflation/march2023includingservicesjanuarytomarch2023

    The peak in the PPI index was October but in takes many months to work through the system.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,899
    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    Anyone who thinks science is “ever” settled doesn’t understand science - but tell that to North Americans or Australians:

    https://www.glaad.org/blog/fact-sheet-evidence-based-healthcare-transgender-people-and-youth
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,177
    So how have Fox reported their news ?
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,342
    algarkirk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Despite a typical thread header from ardent Republican TSE I don't think these numbers should worry the monarchy. About half the population will still watch or take part in celebrating the coronation guaranteeing it huge viewing figures still and it will also bring in lots of tourism.

    Remember too Charles and Camilla are most popular with their fellow pensioners, so no surprises that generation are the ones most interested in their coronation. William and Kate are popular across the generations though. Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    The popularity of the monarchy can only be rationally measured by comparisons (with detail) with the alternatives.
    Indeed. A recent German poll had 8% in favour of Germany becoming a monarchy.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,788
    edited April 2023

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    A victory for the first amendment and a humiliation for the woke and Dems.
  • Options
    BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,469

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    I think you'll find the sort of person who might be theoretically acceptable as a President will almost certainly be a monarchist themselves. Certainly, Attenborough is. BB was a pretty good Roman emperor as I recall (played Augustus in "I Claudius" opposite Derek Jacobi as Claudius).
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,973
    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    This is essentially the route Sweden is taking, which seems to make sense.
    Yay for Sweden, then.
  • Options
    Driver said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
    I think you underestimate the public.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,048
    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    All hail President Lineker!
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,342

    Driver said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
    I think you underestimate the public.
    Most non-executive presidents aren't directly elected anyway.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,333
    .

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    No, that's just an illustration that inflation doesn't happen all at once.
    Services inflation, for example, tends to lag considerably.

    It's quite likely that inflation will continue to be quite sticky even as commodity costs fall.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,333
    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    I'm surprised you didn't run with the stuffed Lenin idea.
  • Options
    LennonLennon Posts: 1,740

    Driver said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
    I think you underestimate the public.
    Clear win for President McPresidentFace...
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,815
    HYUFD said:

    Despite a typical thread header from ardent Republican TSE I don't think these numbers should worry the monarchy. About half the population will still watch or take part in celebrating the coronation guaranteeing it huge viewing figures still and it will also bring in lots of tourism.

    Remember too Charles and Camilla are most popular with their fellow pensioners, so no surprises that generation are the ones most interested in their coronation. William and Kate are popular across the generations though. Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    We would be more likely to get President Ant or President Dec.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,899

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    The tragedy in this is that it’s possible that the “Affirmative Care” model may be the right course for some candidates, while it’s simply castration and mutilation for others. So GOP states will stop all care while Dem states will carry on castrating. And children will be the victims.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,815
    Just received this:

    A message from the Prime Minister

    Hi there - is there anything you’ve ever wanted to ask me? Well, now’s your chance.

    On Monday 24 April I’ll be answering questions from the business community live on LinkedIn.

    One of my top priorities as Prime Minister is to grow the economy. And you - the British businesses, entrepreneurs, innovators and young people inventing the future - are at the heart of that.

    Click here to attend and ask me a question.

    Speak to you then,
    Rishi Sunak
    The Prime Minister


    I'll pass.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,242
    kamski said:

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    Yes once you take out the two largest items in most households' budgets inflation only looks too high rather than way too high. 'Tis but a flesh wound!
    Look at it this way: for homeless alcoholic smokers who eat out of bins, inflation (for booze and fags) is only 5%!
    People who eat of bins are a growing demographic.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,815
    Driver said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
    Not in Ireland. Prior to the current wee fella, the qualification for becoming president was to be called Mary.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,751

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    Anyone who thinks science is “ever” settled doesn’t understand science - but tell that to North Americans or Australians:

    https://www.glaad.org/blog/fact-sheet-evidence-based-healthcare-transgender-people-and-youth
    Yes. To be science it has to have verification and falsification conditions. Which is why it works, and why it can never give a full account of reality. And why proper science is humble and awesome.

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,333

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    There is a serious issue of consent involved in that approach which needs addressing.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,539
    edited April 2023

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Ha, yes, I wonder.

    More suits coming - are the hounds closing in on this pest?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,958
    Driver said:

    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    Well I’m 50 and I’m avoiding the coronation by going to France for the weekend, it’s nothing personal we did the same for Diana’s funeral.

    Ironically twin A will actually be there but we didn’t know that when we booked the flights.

    This is my plans for that weekend.

    The leader of Britain’s largest anti-monarchist group says more than 1,350 people have pledged to protest during the coronation parade in May.

    Graham Smith, the head of Republic, said the demonstration would mark “the largest protest action” in the group’s 50-year history.

    Republic activists will wear yellow T-shirts and wave yellow placards to create an “unmissable sea of yellow” along the procession route in central London, he said. When the newly crowned King passes in his gold stage coach, they plan to boo loudly and chant: “Not my King”.

    Most of the demonstration will be in Trafalgar Square but smaller groups of anti-monarchists will be dotted along other sections of the route.

    Smith, 48, said activists would aim to arrive early in the morning to be as close to the barriers as possible. He stressed, however, that they were not planning any Extinction Rebellion-style stunts, because “it’s not a good look” and “doesn’t help the cause”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anti-royal-monarchy-protest-coronation-not-my-king-krf5gf8gb
    The legal and constitutional inaccuracy of this slogan bothers me; it just isn't right unless you are a foreign citizen.

    "We don't want you as King!", Or "Republic Now!", would work, but this is a slogan for the ignorant or uneducated.
    It's another stupid American import to our culture, the same fools who kept saying "Not my president" about Trump.
    It is Boris who has taught us all the political power of the (inaccurate) three word slogan.
    Education, education, education.
    Unfortunately I am not educated enough to know whether that is a one word slogan with repetition or a three word slogan....
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,242

    HYUFD said:

    Despite a typical thread header from ardent Republican TSE I don't think these numbers should worry the monarchy. About half the population will still watch or take part in celebrating the coronation guaranteeing it huge viewing figures still and it will also bring in lots of tourism.

    Remember too Charles and Camilla are most popular with their fellow pensioners, so no surprises that generation are the ones most interested in their coronation. William and Kate are popular across the generations though. Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    We would be more likely to get President Ant or President Dec.
    Why not Ant and Dec as Consuls? It worked for the Roman Republic.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,958
    kinabalu said:

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Ha, yes, I wonder.

    More suits coming - are the hounds closing in on this pest?
    In spades I would think, as others try and join the Dominion club. It would take a real diamond with a heart of gold not to find this amusing.
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522
    .

    Driver said:

    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    Well I’m 50 and I’m avoiding the coronation by going to France for the weekend, it’s nothing personal we did the same for Diana’s funeral.

    Ironically twin A will actually be there but we didn’t know that when we booked the flights.

    This is my plans for that weekend.

    The leader of Britain’s largest anti-monarchist group says more than 1,350 people have pledged to protest during the coronation parade in May.

    Graham Smith, the head of Republic, said the demonstration would mark “the largest protest action” in the group’s 50-year history.

    Republic activists will wear yellow T-shirts and wave yellow placards to create an “unmissable sea of yellow” along the procession route in central London, he said. When the newly crowned King passes in his gold stage coach, they plan to boo loudly and chant: “Not my King”.

    Most of the demonstration will be in Trafalgar Square but smaller groups of anti-monarchists will be dotted along other sections of the route.

    Smith, 48, said activists would aim to arrive early in the morning to be as close to the barriers as possible. He stressed, however, that they were not planning any Extinction Rebellion-style stunts, because “it’s not a good look” and “doesn’t help the cause”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anti-royal-monarchy-protest-coronation-not-my-king-krf5gf8gb
    The legal and constitutional inaccuracy of this slogan bothers me; it just isn't right unless you are a foreign citizen.

    "We don't want you as King!", Or "Republic Now!", would work, but this is a slogan for the ignorant or uneducated.
    It's another stupid American import to our culture, the same fools who kept saying "Not my president" about Trump.
    It is Boris who has taught us all the political power of the (inaccurate) three word slogan.
    Education, education, education.
    Unfortunately I am not educated enough to know whether that is a one word slogan with repetition or a three word slogan....
    Surely it's the repetition that turned the word into a slogan?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,170

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    The tragedy in this is that it’s possible that the “Affirmative Care” model may be the right course for some candidates, while it’s simply castration and mutilation for others. So GOP states will stop all care while Dem states will carry on castrating. And children will be the victims.
    As American cultural commentator Tim Pool points out, there will quickly be a conservative majority in the US, if the liberals keep having abortions and castrating their children, as the conservatives have large families.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,242

    kinabalu said:

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Ha, yes, I wonder.

    More suits coming - are the hounds closing in on this pest?
    In spades I would think, as others try and join the Dominion club. It would take a real diamond with a heart of gold not to find this amusing.
    Hopefully it will end with no Trumps.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,433

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Dunno but Brillo was on R4 this am simultaneously pontificating expertly on Murdoch and News Corp while simultaneously giving the impression of having had nothing to do with Murdoch and News Corp. Quite impressive in its way.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,973

    Carnyx said:

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    THanks for that - very interesting. Food I had expected but not housing, not to that degree.
    Reportedly BTL landlords have increased rents to cover mortgage repayments as interest rates were raised in order to combat inflation, or something.
    The 3% rent cap in Scotland will obviously be going down like a cup of cold sick with the public. Well it will be once the media have finished with it.

    'Stampede of BTL landlords from the vital rentier sector!'
    No, people will be celebrating.

    They will start wondering why there’s no rental property, but for a considerable amount of time they will cling to

    1) Racist theories about foreigners stealing all the properties.
    2) Tories Dun It.
    3) Something Something

    You will, of course, have the people still in rented accommodation who will now be a client group supporting Rent Control.

    See New York and how long the disaster there continued.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,024

    Just received this:

    A message from the Prime Minister

    Hi there - is there anything you’ve ever wanted to ask me? Well, now’s your chance.

    On Monday 24 April I’ll be answering questions from the business community live on LinkedIn.

    One of my top priorities as Prime Minister is to grow the economy. And you - the British businesses, entrepreneurs, innovators and young people inventing the future - are at the heart of that.

    Click here to attend and ask me a question.

    Speak to you then,
    Rishi Sunak
    The Prime Minister


    I'll pass.

    When are we going to rejoin the single market?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,958
    Nigelb said:

    .

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    No, that's just an illustration that inflation doesn't happen all at once.
    Services inflation, for example, tends to lag considerably.

    It's quite likely that inflation will continue to be quite sticky even as commodity costs fall.
    It is easy for many on this board, which is, on average, significantly wealthier than the country to underestimate the impact of inflation on others.

    If I bought the same food items I did last year, my food inflation would probably be around 20%, but its actually easy for me to substitute and find cheaper better value items so it is probably below 10%. Even if it was 20% I am not sure how much I would really notice it apart from surprise at the prices, of course my bank balance would be a little less at the end of the year but it wouldn't create stress or health issues.

    If I was already buying the cheapest items possible and had no savings I would not have the option of substitution, I would have to either go into debt, find a way to make more money (probably illegally given the high marginal rates on UC earnings) or reduce what I bought. That would create stress. It is simply a different experience.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,282
    On topic: top trolling @TheScreamingEagles

  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,433
    Sandpit said:

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    The tragedy in this is that it’s possible that the “Affirmative Care” model may be the right course for some candidates, while it’s simply castration and mutilation for others. So GOP states will stop all care while Dem states will carry on castrating. And children will be the victims.
    As American cultural commentator Tim Pool points out, there will quickly be a conservative majority in the US, if the liberals keep having abortions and castrating their children, as the conservatives have large families.
    The Neil Oliver of political academe Matt Goodwin thinks a turn to conservatism is in the genes.

    https://twitter.com/adambienkov/status/1647505793976074240?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,973
    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    There is a serious issue of consent involved in that approach which needs addressing.
    Informed consent is a part of modern clinical trials framework.

    My first thought when society encounters an issue is not “We must change everything”. It’s “What have we done before and how did that work out?”
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,282
    I didn't even know there was an extra bank holiday on 8 May until a week ago when I saw it pop up in my diary. Obviously I'm happy to take the extra day off but won't be doing any celebrating of the inhumane genetic lottery that we persist with for reasons unclear to me. I feel sorry for anyone born into that miserable life in the goldfish bowl.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,958

    kinabalu said:

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Ha, yes, I wonder.

    More suits coming - are the hounds closing in on this pest?
    In spades I would think, as others try and join the Dominion club. It would take a real diamond with a heart of gold not to find this amusing.
    Hopefully it will end with no Trumps.
    I think he may win the nomination but the public have seen enough of that particular joker.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,749
    edited April 2023
    Driver said:

    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    Well I’m 50 and I’m avoiding the coronation by going to France for the weekend, it’s nothing personal we did the same for Diana’s funeral.

    Ironically twin A will actually be there but we didn’t know that when we booked the flights.

    This is my plans for that weekend.

    The leader of Britain’s largest anti-monarchist group says more than 1,350 people have pledged to protest during the coronation parade in May.

    Graham Smith, the head of Republic, said the demonstration would mark “the largest protest action” in the group’s 50-year history.

    Republic activists will wear yellow T-shirts and wave yellow placards to create an “unmissable sea of yellow” along the procession route in central London, he said. When the newly crowned King passes in his gold stage coach, they plan to boo loudly and chant: “Not my King”.

    Most of the demonstration will be in Trafalgar Square but smaller groups of anti-monarchists will be dotted along other sections of the route.

    Smith, 48, said activists would aim to arrive early in the morning to be as close to the barriers as possible. He stressed, however, that they were not planning any Extinction Rebellion-style stunts, because “it’s not a good look” and “doesn’t help the cause”.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anti-royal-monarchy-protest-coronation-not-my-king-krf5gf8gb
    The legal and constitutional inaccuracy of this slogan bothers me; it just isn't right unless you are a foreign citizen.

    "We don't want you as King!", Or "Republic Now!", would work, but this is a slogan for the ignorant or uneducated.
    It's another stupid American import to our culture, the same fools who kept saying "Not my president" about Trump.
    It is Boris who has taught us all the political power of the (inaccurate) three word slogan.
    Education, education, education.
    No, no, no.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,126

    Just received this:

    A message from the Prime Minister

    Hi there - is there anything you’ve ever wanted to ask me? Well, now’s your chance.

    On Monday 24 April I’ll be answering questions from the business community live on LinkedIn.

    One of my top priorities as Prime Minister is to grow the economy. And you - the British businesses, entrepreneurs, innovators and young people inventing the future - are at the heart of that.

    Click here to attend and ask me a question.

    Speak to you then,
    Rishi Sunak
    The Prime Minister


    I'll pass.

    Linked Fucking In. Nerd PM goes on Nerd Facebook.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,282

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    I know I am very fortunate in life, I want everyone to have the opportunities I did, I just have worked out how to come up with a policy to do so.
    It's not possible for everyone to win. What you need are policies that ensure that people who don't have your opportunities don't have an unbearably shit life either. That's why, despite bring a big believer in working hard and taking responsibility and all that jazz, I am not a Tory.
    Yep –if you are a meritocrat you can't support a party that favours wealth over work.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,740

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    Yes once you take out the two largest items in most households' budgets inflation only looks too high rather than way too high. 'Tis but a flesh wound!
    Also explains some of the "I'm alright Jack (Monroe)" stuff we see here.

    If your housing costs were fixed by taking out a mortgage 20 years ago, life is pretty good, because the costs of a lot of discretionary spending aren't rising that fast.

    If accommodation, food and utilities are the bulk of the our budget, it looks a lot worse.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,039
    Dura_Ace said:

    Just received this:

    A message from the Prime Minister

    Hi there - is there anything you’ve ever wanted to ask me? Well, now’s your chance.

    On Monday 24 April I’ll be answering questions from the business community live on LinkedIn.

    One of my top priorities as Prime Minister is to grow the economy. And you - the British businesses, entrepreneurs, innovators and young people inventing the future - are at the heart of that.

    Click here to attend and ask me a question.

    Speak to you then,
    Rishi Sunak
    The Prime Minister


    I'll pass.

    Linked Fucking In. Nerd PM goes on Nerd Facebook.
    5 minutes on Twitter and I want to kill myself. 5 minutes on LinkedIn and I want to take the world down with me.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,333

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Avoiding the salient facts.
    Like they paid over $700m because they were knowing, libellous liars.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/fox-news-media-dominion-voting-systems-reach-agreement-over-defamation-lawsuit
    Dominion Voting Systems filed a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against FOX News Media in March 2021.

    Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis, who was overseeing the defamation lawsuit, praised both parties for their handling of the case.

    "I have been on the bench since 2010. … I think this is the best lawyering I’ve had, ever," Davis said, adding, "I would be proud to be your judge in the future."


    The settlement came as a trial was scheduled to launch this week with a jury selected earlier in the day.

    The lawsuit, which stemmed from coverage of the post-2020 presidential election, had become media fodder with news outlets closely watching the outcome of the highly publicized legal battle.

    Then-President Donald Trump and his allies fiercely challenged Joe Biden's victory in the weeks following the election. Some of them, including members of his legal team, made false and unsubstantiated claims against Dominion Voting Systems and are the subject of separate defamation lawsuits.


    The bolded bit is especially egregious given the number of times they were sanctioned like this.

    Judge sanctions Fox News for withholding evidence in Dominion lawsuit
    https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3946538-judge-sanctions-fox-news-for-withholding-evidence-in-dominion-lawsuit/

    I guess three quarters of a billion buys you the right to continue lying.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,899
    Is the truth about SNP fundraising shenanigans hiding in plain sight? £482k of the £667k total was raised in 2017.

    On 31st Dec 2017, the party had just £8k of cash.

    An SNP spokesperson suggested to the Herald that the money had been spent on the 2017 general election campaign.


    https://twitter.com/staylorish/status/1648612185432629248?s=20
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,333

    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    There is a serious issue of consent involved in that approach which needs addressing.
    Informed consent is a part of modern clinical trials framework.

    My first thought when society encounters an issue is not “We must change everything”. It’s “What have we done before and how did that work out?”
    But in this case, you're potentially talking about withholding treatment which is already available in order to do any such trials.
    In that context, what does informed consent mean ?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,170

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    But if you are already in an overcrowded home, don't have another baby. Seems obvious.
    What else can you do when the telly breaks down?

    That's obvious.

    You tuck in to a heated debate on here about cash, Gary Lineker, Brexit or Venison.

    Much better than sex.
    It’s all a distant memory now, but that’s not my recollection. The heated debates last longer, though.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,039

    Driver said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
    I think you underestimate the public.
    Just select a citizen at random, like Borges's Lottery of Babylon.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,282
    kamski said:

    Sandpit said:

    On topic - people who think there should be a monarchy but also think the public shouldn't fund the Coronation ceremony are idiots.
    I will probably watch it. God save the King!

    The cost to the Exchequer is said to be around £100m, of which a reasonable amount will cycle back to the Treasury in taxes. There will be tens of thousands of foreign tourists turning up, which will boost the economy, and the worldwide TV coverage will likely lead to increased UK inbound tourism over the summer.

    It’s like a bigger-scale version of Singapore paying $20m for each F1 race, and making it back from tourism.
    I'm pretty sure we have this 'boost to the economy' claim every time there is a royalty-related bank holiday. It is of course nonsense.
    Rather like the absurd 'news' that the BBC parrots every time that 'pubs will be allowed to open past 11pm'.

    They have been allowed to open past 11pm since the licensing laws changed in... (checks notes) 2003... and indeed many do, every weekend, regardless of whether there is royal-bothering on.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,039

    CPI inflation remains stubbornly high at 10.1% - and there are two main reasons.

    The first is the price of putting a roof over your head - up 26.1% over the last 12 months

    The second is spiralling food price inflation - which at 19.1% during the year to March is at a 45-year high.

    Driven by food and housing costs, this inflation data remains politically explosive.

    This cost-of-living crisis is still very much with us - and will continue to dominate politics, as it has for the past 18 months.



    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1648577148003680256?s=20

    Another way of looking at it, and I appreciate this is easy for me to say, is that inflation is sort of alright once you take out food and housing costs out of consideration.

    A spread of numbers from 3-7% for the rest there, which isn't so bad.
    Yes once you take out the two largest items in most households' budgets inflation only looks too high rather than way too high. 'Tis but a flesh wound!
    Also explains some of the "I'm alright Jack (Monroe)" stuff we see here.

    If your housing costs were fixed by taking out a mortgage 20 years ago, life is pretty good, because the costs of a lot of discretionary spending aren't rising that fast.

    If accommodation, food and utilities are the bulk of the our budget, it looks a lot worse.
    This is true. Via promotions I earn a fair bit more than I did in 2015, but have less disposable income because yes - mortgage, food, transport and utilities take up a big chunk of the budget.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,053
    Nigelb said:

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Avoiding the salient facts.
    Like they paid over $700m because they were knowing, libellous liars.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/fox-news-media-dominion-voting-systems-reach-agreement-over-defamation-lawsuit
    Dominion Voting Systems filed a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against FOX News Media in March 2021.

    Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis, who was overseeing the defamation lawsuit, praised both parties for their handling of the case.

    "I have been on the bench since 2010. … I think this is the best lawyering I’ve had, ever," Davis said, adding, "I would be proud to be your judge in the future."


    The settlement came as a trial was scheduled to launch this week with a jury selected earlier in the day.

    The lawsuit, which stemmed from coverage of the post-2020 presidential election, had become media fodder with news outlets closely watching the outcome of the highly publicized legal battle.

    Then-President Donald Trump and his allies fiercely challenged Joe Biden's victory in the weeks following the election. Some of them, including members of his legal team, made false and unsubstantiated claims against Dominion Voting Systems and are the subject of separate defamation lawsuits.


    The bolded bit is especially egregious given the number of times they were sanctioned like this.

    Judge sanctions Fox News for withholding evidence in Dominion lawsuit
    https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3946538-judge-sanctions-fox-news-for-withholding-evidence-in-dominion-lawsuit/

    I guess three quarters of a billion buys you the right to continue lying.
    We recently settled a matter, once a case is settled then neither party should discuss it further no matter how bad the taste is that might be left in the mouth.
    If Tucker Carlson & Sean Hannity carry on slandering Dominion then that's a whole new set of potential damages.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,039

    kamski said:

    Sandpit said:

    On topic - people who think there should be a monarchy but also think the public shouldn't fund the Coronation ceremony are idiots.
    I will probably watch it. God save the King!

    The cost to the Exchequer is said to be around £100m, of which a reasonable amount will cycle back to the Treasury in taxes. There will be tens of thousands of foreign tourists turning up, which will boost the economy, and the worldwide TV coverage will likely lead to increased UK inbound tourism over the summer.

    It’s like a bigger-scale version of Singapore paying $20m for each F1 race, and making it back from tourism.
    I'm pretty sure we have this 'boost to the economy' claim every time there is a royalty-related bank holiday. It is of course nonsense.
    Rather like the absurd 'news' that the BBC parrots every time that 'pubs will be allowed to open past 11pm'.

    They have been allowed to open past 11pm since the licensing laws changed in... (checks notes) 2003... and indeed many do, every weekend, regardless of whether there is royal-bothering on.
    Side note, but month or so ago I was surprised by being offered to stay for a lock-in for the first time in over a decade. I had to get home, unfortunately, but was tempted to stay just for the nostalgia.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,161
    Ghedebrav said:

    Driver said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
    I think you underestimate the public.
    Just select a citizen at random, like Borges's Lottery of Babylon.
    For the president I think you want someone inoffensive so what you could do is pick 10 people at random from the electoral register, have Sue Lawley or somebody do a fairly gentle interview with each of them, then have an election where everyone gets 10 veto points to spread across the candidates in whatever way they see fit. Whoever gets the least veto points wins.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,899
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Selebian said:

    So much for “the science is settled”

    1/2. Today, we (researchers & 🇸🇪Swedish government agency @SBU) publish our systematic review on #gender dysphoria in children:
    ➡️Hormone treatment should only be administered as part of of clinical trials.
    @ActaPaediatrica @karolinskainst @AmerAcadPeds
    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791


    https://twitter.com/ludvigsson/status/1648591418166738946?s=20

    Anyone who thinks the science is settled is an idiot.

    There's a startling lack of science of this topic and an even greater lack of good science.

    I know the UK team working with the Cass review will be publishing some systematic reviews this year, which will tend to underline that, rather than coming to any clear conclusions. A secondary data analysis should also be completed this year, although the data to make any very firm conclusions (unless there's something really startling) will also be lacking, I think.
    The only sensible approach I can think of, is to use the legal and moral framework of clinical trials to get good science out of this.
    There is a serious issue of consent involved in that approach which needs addressing.
    Informed consent is a part of modern clinical trials framework.

    My first thought when society encounters an issue is not “We must change everything”. It’s “What have we done before and how did that work out?”
    But in this case, you're potentially talking about withholding treatment which is already available in order to do any such trials.
    In that context, what does informed consent mean ?
    How do you get informed consent to treatment when the off-lable use of these drugs have unknown long term side effects, with concerns over brain development and osteoporosis?

    It’s a right old mess - made worse by the proponents of “Affirmative care” misrepresenting the science, such as it is.

    The gender-affirmative medical model uses evidence from a small number of low-quality studies to show puberty blockers and hormone treatment have a positive effect on teenagers’ mental health. Separate evidence from medical trials suggests the placebo effect on mental health outcomes is large and significant. This paper adds to the literature on the treatment of gender dysphoria by using data from comparable studies on teenagers’ mental health to assess whether puberty blockers and hormone treatment are better than placebo at alleviating distress. It looks at trials of medication specific to mental health – for example, drugs aimed at treating depression, irritability, schizophrenia and generalised anxiety disorder – to isolate the placebo effect. The data shows that the average improvement in mental health over the course of treatment is no bigger for gender medications than it is for placebo. The headline data, in fact, suggests that placebo does more for teenagers’ mental health than gender medication does, although we do not have the aggregate data on variance that would be needed to state this categorically.

    https://sex-matters.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Teenagers-medication-vs-placebo.pdf
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,282

    A lot who say they will not watch will in some form or other. It will be inescapable unless you want to watch old episodes of Coronation Street......

    Inescapable? Er, no. Get a life. Turn off the telly and get blasted with your pals – Super Saturday.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,282

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    But if you are already in an overcrowded home, don't have another baby. Seems obvious.
    Given you don't think anyone should have any babies at all, your views on this should be treated with extreme caution.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,601
    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    Harry (and/or Meghan) as president would be fun,* wouldn't it?

    *the process and act of becoming president and the subsequent spontaneous immolation of the Mail, Express etc and their readers. Might be a disaster as actual president
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,334

    Have fewer kids?

    More than 310,000 children in England share a bed with parents or siblings because of overcrowded homes, research suggests.

    Almost two million children — one in six — live in overcrowded homes because their family cannot access a suitable affordable home, according to the National Housing Federation, the umbrella body for almost 600 housing associations.

    “I sleep on the sofa,” Dionne Barnes, 61, who lives with three children in a two-bedroom, tenth-floor flat in Bristol, said. “The only time I have space to myself is in the bathroom.” Her daughter, Chané, 31, who is eight months pregnant, shares a bedroom with her younger sister, Mihema-Ré, 8, who struggles to do homework in the cramped space.

    Their autistic brother, Touré, 14, has the second bedroom. “My son loves the outdoors but he just stays in his room,” said Barnes, who runs a catering business and rents the flat from the council. She is waiting to be rehoused but was told it would take at least 18 months.

    Researchers, who combined a survey of 207 households by the market research company Savanta with analysis of the government’s English Housing Survey, said the findings were “indicative”. The study uses the government definition of overcrowded homes, where a room is shared by more than two children under ten, two teenagers of different sexes or two adults who are not in a relationship.

    Parents in 180,000 families regularly sleep in a living room, bathroom, hallway or kitchen, the study suggests. Half a million children, including 142,000 teenagers, share a bedroom with their parents. Up to 900,000 children struggle to do their homework.

    Parents in more than half (53 per cent) of England’s 746,000 overcrowded homes worry that their children are too embarrassed to bring friends home. Three quarters of overcrowded families said it harmed their health and mental health.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/overcrowded-homes-force-300-000-children-to-share-bed-zmn9q5rbk

    That's a pretty ignorant comment, and is beneath you. Plenty of families are in overcrowded accommodation because of a change in circumstances such as death or illness of a breadwinner, being evicted from a more suitable property or family breakup. Also, children are probably the greatest source of joy in people's life - maybe the only true thing that gives life meaning - and I certainly understand why people don't necessarily wait until all their financial ducks are in a row before becoming parents - especially since for many that would mean never having children.
    The real problem is the failure of successive governments to overcome the vested interests that hold back homebuilding. We should be embarking on a social housing construction boom, not victim blaming families in overcrowded homes.
    I agree about the failures and having kids being awesome but I may well be an outlier but before having kids I made sure I could give them a decent quality of life.
    You are lucky that that was an option and that circumstances have not intervened.
    I know I am very fortunate in life, I want everyone to have the opportunities I did, I just have worked out how to come up with a policy to do so.
    It's not possible for everyone to win. What you need are policies that ensure that people who don't have your opportunities don't have an unbearably shit life either. That's why, despite bring a big believer in working hard and taking responsibility and all that jazz, I am not a Tory.
    Yep –if you are a meritocrat you can't support a party that favours wealth over work.
    It doesn't, it favours both. Hence it has increased the minimum wage and cut income tax as well as cut inheritance tax
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,433
    edited April 2023
    Jeezo, an endorser of Truss and foreign secretary of a government polling in the 20s tweets.
    Simpsons memes and LinkedIn, the modern Conservative Party.


  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,333
    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    So how have Fox reported their news ?

    Avoiding the salient facts.
    Like they paid over $700m because they were knowing, libellous liars.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/fox-news-media-dominion-voting-systems-reach-agreement-over-defamation-lawsuit
    Dominion Voting Systems filed a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against FOX News Media in March 2021.

    Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis, who was overseeing the defamation lawsuit, praised both parties for their handling of the case.

    "I have been on the bench since 2010. … I think this is the best lawyering I’ve had, ever," Davis said, adding, "I would be proud to be your judge in the future."


    The settlement came as a trial was scheduled to launch this week with a jury selected earlier in the day.

    The lawsuit, which stemmed from coverage of the post-2020 presidential election, had become media fodder with news outlets closely watching the outcome of the highly publicized legal battle.

    Then-President Donald Trump and his allies fiercely challenged Joe Biden's victory in the weeks following the election. Some of them, including members of his legal team, made false and unsubstantiated claims against Dominion Voting Systems and are the subject of separate defamation lawsuits.


    The bolded bit is especially egregious given the number of times they were sanctioned like this.

    Judge sanctions Fox News for withholding evidence in Dominion lawsuit
    https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3946538-judge-sanctions-fox-news-for-withholding-evidence-in-dominion-lawsuit/

    I guess three quarters of a billion buys you the right to continue lying.
    We recently settled a matter, once a case is settled then neither party should discuss it further no matter how bad the taste is that might be left in the mouth.
    If Tucker Carlson & Sean Hannity carry on slandering Dominion then that's a whole new set of potential damages.
    Dominion's CEO yesterday: “Fox has admitted to telling lies about Dominion.”
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,334

    Driver said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    HYUFD said:

    Longer term constitutional monarchy will also be preferred over a President Johnson or President Blair

    Those aren't the only two options. We could have somebody good as president like Stormzy or Jack Monroe.
    President Brian Blessed or President David Attenborough, both would be more popular than King Charles III.
    You think our politicians are going to let a mere celebrity be president?

    Elect the president = get a politician.
    Not in Ireland. Prior to the current wee fella, the qualification for becoming president was to be called Mary.
    The current Irish President is an ex Labour politiician whose wife has urged Zelensky to make peace with Putin
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,899
    📢 Final Eurostat data confirm that the main reason for the UK's relatively high headline #inflation rate is still #energy prices, with little difference in #food price inflation, or the 'core' rates... 👇

    (These are the 'harmonised' CPIs, which may differ from 'national' rates)




    https://twitter.com/julianHjessop/status/1648619223516692482?s=20
This discussion has been closed.