The SNP’s former Treasurer Colin Beattie has told journalists that he “didn’t know” about the SNP’s motorhome. He was asked: “Did you know about the motorhome purchase and did you sign it off?” He replied: “No, I didn’t know about it.” Mr Beattie then walked away from the group.
He what? That bloody motorhome really is a baffling part of this story. Who, why, where, it's a mess
It is indeed, especially when looked at in the context of the accounts. At the end of the accounting period (in which there is no evidence of the acquisition of such a vehicle) the SNP had access to something like £200k for fighting future campaigns. To spend more than half of that on a motorhome is genuinely inexplicable. Within months of the apparent purchase Mr Murrell makes an (undeclared) loan to the party of almost the exact size as the purchase because the party is suffering "cash flow problems".
The NEC, the deputy leader, the Treasurer, members of the Cabinet and all of the leadership candidates were simply not told of the expenditure of nearly half of the available money. It's completely weird. Its almost as if a small number of people at the top of the party knew that there was plenty of other money available if it was needed which was not reflected in the official accounts.
It's baffling. I thought I understood the original allegation (discussed on here several times over the last 2 years) regarding the SNP independence fund.
The story made sense; the SNP needed cash, it had cash, and at least some people thought they could spend the cash it had. Then Murrell bailed it out, a bit, to stem the damage and/or dissuade donors from raising complaints publicly. The piggy bank would be quietly refilled, only political weirdos would even notice.
But this bus I have no idea about.
Was the motor home in the accounts as a fixed asset?
The fact everyone is going "Huh????" suggests not.
Although....anyone who asked to see those accounts could, but they would have to kill you afterwards.
I just got an impressively mental PMC Wagner recruitment advert on Telegram. It promises that recruits will be delivered from bankruptcy, all bad habits and, I'm not making this up, "сварливая теща". Lit. "grumpy mother in law".
The SNP’s former Treasurer Colin Beattie has told journalists that he “didn’t know” about the SNP’s motorhome. He was asked: “Did you know about the motorhome purchase and did you sign it off?” He replied: “No, I didn’t know about it.” Mr Beattie then walked away from the group.
He what? That bloody motorhome really is a baffling part of this story. Who, why, where, it's a mess
It is indeed, especially when looked at in the context of the accounts. At the end of the accounting period (in which there is no evidence of the acquisition of such a vehicle) the SNP had access to something like £200k for fighting future campaigns. To spend more than half of that on a motorhome is genuinely inexplicable. Within months of the apparent purchase Mr Murrell makes an (undeclared) loan to the party of almost the exact size as the purchase because the party is suffering "cash flow problems".
The NEC, the deputy leader, the Treasurer, members of the Cabinet and all of the leadership candidates were simply not told of the expenditure of nearly half of the available money. It's completely weird. Its almost as if a small number of people at the top of the party knew that there was plenty of other money available if it was needed which was not reflected in the official accounts.
It's baffling. I thought I understood the original allegation (discussed on here several times over the last 2 years) regarding the SNP independence fund.
The story made sense; the SNP needed cash, it had cash, and at least some people thought they could spend the cash it had. Then Murrell bailed it out, a bit, to stem the damage and/or dissuade donors from raising complaints publicly. The piggy bank would be quietly refilled, only political weirdos would even notice.
But this bus I have no idea about.
Was the motor home in the accounts as a fixed asset?
Sky showing we are using 51.5% gas and just 23.7% renewables just now, no doubt as I look from our balcony to the Gwynt y Mor offshore wind farm they are barely turning and I assume other wind farms across the UK are the same
My car needed defrosting this morning and it’s nearly May!
Frosts in the North East can happen well into May.
Always plant my humble tomatoes and bedding plants out on the last bank holiday in May.
My car was also covered in frost this morning and there was some hail yesterday evening. This is a cold spring.
Interesting, although I see your data is for central England rather than Scotland. I would say, subjectively, it has been colder and drier than normal this year.
I know someone who'd shown that central England Temperature anomalies were a pretty good proxy for Northern European temperature anomalies.
Though I should point out that the anomalies in the link are compared to 1961-90. Present-day averages are at least 1C higher and something of a moving target. So, you can probably say that April has been a little bit colder than what passes for normal these days, but it's not a patch on the couple of cold springs we've had in the last decade (I think 2013 and 2017 were most notable from memory).
I just got an impressively mental PMC Wagner recruitment advert on Telegram. It promises that recruits will be delivered from bankruptcy, all bad habits and, I'm not making this up, "сварливая теща". Lit. "grumpy mother in law".
Sky showing we are using 51.5% gas and just 23.7% renewables just now, no doubt as I look from our balcony to the Gwynt y Mor offshore wind farm they are barely turning and I assume other wind farms across the UK are the same
My car needed defrosting this morning and it’s nearly May!
Frosts in the North East can happen well into May.
Always plant my humble tomatoes and bedding plants out on the last bank holiday in May.
My car was also covered in frost this morning and there was some hail yesterday evening. This is a cold spring.
Quite a few were early at the start of the year (insanely early in a few cases). But then as March went into April, things have really quietened down. The number of species being registered is still there, but all the moth trappers are referencing the very low numbers of moths for those species that are about.
Now, this might be related to the weather this year. But it could also be down to a poor spring last year that impacted the food plants not being available. We also had ground like concrete late in the spring which made it damn near impossible for some moths to emerge.
Whichever, if we have another spring like this next year, time to get very worried.
The GOP platform is likely to be as much a problem for them as the choice of candidate.
2024 Republicans run into political buzz saw on abortion https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3967236-2024-republicans-run-into-political-buzz-saw-on-abortion/ Republicans are running into a political buzz saw on abortion, with the party’s presidential candidates facing serious pressure to adopt highly restrictive policies that others in the GOP fear will cost the party the White House next year. Former President Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 GOP nomination, received significant pushback from several high-profile abortion opponent groups last week when his campaign issued a statement suggesting he supported the idea that the issue of abortion should be decided at the state level. Trump sought to defend his record on abortion following the criticism during an event in Iowa, noting the three Supreme Court justices he tapped while in office were ultimately part of the high court’s majority in overturning Roe v. Wade last year. Other potential GOP candidates have taken stricter positions. At a Heritage Foundation event last week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) drew applause from the crowd when he touted signing a six-week abortion ban in his state. Former Vice President Pence has doubled down on his stance on the abortion pill mifepristone — which has been approved by regulators for 23 years — saying this week he wanted to see it “off the market.” ..
I'm not sure about this.
Abortion is very much a wedge issue, and adopting a hard line puts a cap on the Republican vote. This prevented them from winning the House election by high single figures (which is a pretty common margin for the out-party in a mid-term). But they did still win that election by just under 3% of the vote, and that'd be sufficient for them in a Presidential election.
Highly divisive politics is quite grim for those of us of a moderate, pragmatic mindset. But it can work electorally - if you judge the wedge issue well, it doesn't matter if 45% of people (say) hate you, and indeed the hatred in itself works really well in motivating the 45% who love you. It can't really deliver a blowout win, but presidential politics is binary.
It was a winning issue for them; it’s a net negative since Dobbs started to have real world consequences. The true believers want ever more extreme restrictions; the vast majority of the US doesn’t. But the true believers still have an outsize voice in the primaries.
It won’t motivate 45% of the electorate. More like 25%, and demotivate some of the 20% balance.
In which case, sell Trump as he's not an abortion hardliner?
I just got an impressively mental PMC Wagner recruitment advert on Telegram. It promises that recruits will be delivered from bankruptcy, all bad habits and, I'm not making this up, "сварливая теща". Lit. "grumpy mother in law".
Leeds United fans and PMC Wagner is surely a match made in heaven hell?
I just got an impressively mental PMC Wagner recruitment advert on Telegram. It promises that recruits will be delivered from bankruptcy, all bad habits and, I'm not making this up, "сварливая теща". Lit. "grumpy mother in law".
Sky showing we are using 51.5% gas and just 23.7% renewables just now, no doubt as I look from our balcony to the Gwynt y Mor offshore wind farm they are barely turning and I assume other wind farms across the UK are the same
My car needed defrosting this morning and it’s nearly May!
Frosts in the North East can happen well into May.
Always plant my humble tomatoes and bedding plants out on the last bank holiday in May.
My car was also covered in frost this morning and there was some hail yesterday evening. This is a cold spring.
Interesting, although I see your data is for central England rather than Scotland. I would say, subjectively, it has been colder and drier than normal this year.
I know someone who'd shown that central England Temperature anomalies were a pretty good proxy for Northern European temperature anomalies.
Though I should point out that the anomalies in the link are compared to 1961-90. Present-day averages are at least 1C higher and something of a moving target. So, you can probably say that April has been a little bit colder than what passes for normal these days, but it's not a patch on the couple of cold springs we've had in the last decade (I think 2013 and 2017 were most notable from memory).
The SNP’s former Treasurer Colin Beattie has told journalists that he “didn’t know” about the SNP’s motorhome. He was asked: “Did you know about the motorhome purchase and did you sign it off?” He replied: “No, I didn’t know about it.” Mr Beattie then walked away from the group.
He what? That bloody motorhome really is a baffling part of this story. Who, why, where, it's a mess
It is indeed, especially when looked at in the context of the accounts. At the end of the accounting period (in which there is no evidence of the acquisition of such a vehicle) the SNP had access to something like £200k for fighting future campaigns. To spend more than half of that on a motorhome is genuinely inexplicable. Within months of the apparent purchase Mr Murrell makes an (undeclared) loan to the party of almost the exact size as the purchase because the party is suffering "cash flow problems".
The NEC, the deputy leader, the Treasurer, members of the Cabinet and all of the leadership candidates were simply not told of the expenditure of nearly half of the available money. It's completely weird. Its almost as if a small number of people at the top of the party knew that there was plenty of other money available if it was needed which was not reflected in the official accounts.
It's baffling. I thought I understood the original allegation (discussed on here several times over the last 2 years) regarding the SNP independence fund.
The story made sense; the SNP needed cash, it had cash, and at least some people thought they could spend the cash it had. Then Murrell bailed it out, a bit, to stem the damage and/or dissuade donors from raising complaints publicly. The piggy bank would be quietly refilled, only political weirdos would even notice.
But this bus I have no idea about.
Was the motor home in the accounts as a fixed asset?
The fact everyone is going "Huh????" suggests not.
Although....anyone who asked to see those accounts could, but they would have to kill you afterwards.
The accounts are here: https://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Api/Accounts/Documents/24333 In the previous year (2020) the SNP had no vehicles. In 2021 the balance sheet shows vehicles of £80,632. That might be the written down value of the motor home or it may be other things. I mentioned that a rather fancy minibus sat outside an SNP office in Dundee for a couple of years, apparently not moving.
Sky showing we are using 51.5% gas and just 23.7% renewables just now, no doubt as I look from our balcony to the Gwynt y Mor offshore wind farm they are barely turning and I assume other wind farms across the UK are the same
My car needed defrosting this morning and it’s nearly May!
Frosts in the North East can happen well into May.
Always plant my humble tomatoes and bedding plants out on the last bank holiday in May.
My car was also covered in frost this morning and there was some hail yesterday evening. This is a cold spring.
Interesting, although I see your data is for central England rather than Scotland. I would say, subjectively, it has been colder and drier than normal this year.
I know someone who'd shown that central England Temperature anomalies were a pretty good proxy for Northern European temperature anomalies.
Though I should point out that the anomalies in the link are compared to 1961-90. Present-day averages are at least 1C higher and something of a moving target. So, you can probably say that April has been a little bit colder than what passes for normal these days, but it's not a patch on the couple of cold springs we've had in the last decade (I think 2013 and 2017 were most notable from memory).
2018 was Beast from the East year.
That wasn't a cold spring though - it was February so very much winter.
Although it might also have been a cold-ish Spring. From memory of the local elections that year, it was unusually variable and I recall delivering leaflets in the snow and in very hot weather within a couple of weeks.
I just got an impressively mental PMC Wagner recruitment advert on Telegram. It promises that recruits will be delivered from bankruptcy, all bad habits and, I'm not making this up, "сварливая теща". Lit. "grumpy mother in law".
Death does deliver from all of those, I guess.
Except the MiL in due course, perhaps, if you believe in hell
@BestForBritain 7m Sunak’s five goals going well, I see. Growth 0.0%; Inflation falling slower than expected; NHS waiting lists growing faster; and no boats “stopped” - unless you count scheduled ones from Dover, delayed by queues.
And now UK debt to GDP hits a record high. I make that 0/5. 👍 ~AA
What's going on? Only a matter of weeks ago I was assured on here that growth was on the up and Labour's fox was well and truly shot.
Growth should come in at c.0.6% for the first quarter. Borrowing came in £13bn below target.
I don't think "target" is the right word, I'd go with "expectations".
Sky showing we are using 51.5% gas and just 23.7% renewables just now, no doubt as I look from our balcony to the Gwynt y Mor offshore wind farm they are barely turning and I assume other wind farms across the UK are the same
My car needed defrosting this morning and it’s nearly May!
Frosts in the North East can happen well into May.
Always plant my humble tomatoes and bedding plants out on the last bank holiday in May.
My car was also covered in frost this morning and there was some hail yesterday evening. This is a cold spring.
Interesting, although I see your data is for central England rather than Scotland. I would say, subjectively, it has been colder and drier than normal this year.
I know someone who'd shown that central England Temperature anomalies were a pretty good proxy for Northern European temperature anomalies.
Though I should point out that the anomalies in the link are compared to 1961-90. Present-day averages are at least 1C higher and something of a moving target. So, you can probably say that April has been a little bit colder than what passes for normal these days, but it's not a patch on the couple of cold springs we've had in the last decade (I think 2013 and 2017 were most notable from memory).
2018 was Beast from the East year.
That wasn't a cold spring though - it was February so very much winter.
Although it might also have been a cold-ish Spring. From memory of the local elections that year, it was unusually variable and I recall delivering leaflets in the snow and in very hot weather within a couple of weeks.
As we all know, Spring doesn't begin until 20 March.
Sky showing we are using 51.5% gas and just 23.7% renewables just now, no doubt as I look from our balcony to the Gwynt y Mor offshore wind farm they are barely turning and I assume other wind farms across the UK are the same
My car needed defrosting this morning and it’s nearly May!
Frosts in the North East can happen well into May.
Always plant my humble tomatoes and bedding plants out on the last bank holiday in May.
My car was also covered in frost this morning and there was some hail yesterday evening. This is a cold spring.
Interesting, although I see your data is for central England rather than Scotland. I would say, subjectively, it has been colder and drier than normal this year.
I know someone who'd shown that central England Temperature anomalies were a pretty good proxy for Northern European temperature anomalies.
Though I should point out that the anomalies in the link are compared to 1961-90. Present-day averages are at least 1C higher and something of a moving target. So, you can probably say that April has been a little bit colder than what passes for normal these days, but it's not a patch on the couple of cold springs we've had in the last decade (I think 2013 and 2017 were most notable from memory).
2018 was Beast from the East year.
That wasn't a cold spring though - it was February so very much winter.
Although it might also have been a cold-ish Spring. From memory of the local elections that year, it was unusually variable and I recall delivering leaflets in the snow and in very hot weather within a couple of weeks.
Beast from the East was March (second week?). Followed by a second great dump of snow, a week later, also in March.
I just got an impressively mental PMC Wagner recruitment advert on Telegram. It promises that recruits will be delivered from bankruptcy, all bad habits and, I'm not making this up, "сварливая теща". Lit. "grumpy mother in law".
Unsurprisingly for brutalised violent criminals the survivors of six months are causing mayhem on discharge:
US aviation authorities suspend Starship launches pending a full accident investigation, which is standard procedure.
The launch pad itself suffered significant damage, and there was more debris kicked up than expected, some of which fell outside the human exclusion zone. Debris from the final explosion, caused by an automated self-destruct ‘flight termination system’ after the first stage failed to achieve its objectives, rained down for hours in the local area off the coast of Texas.
They’re going to have to rebuild the pad, and come up with a much better exhaust suppression system. Which, to be fair, they were planning anyway.
*) The pad system didn't work. Although I await details, I'm far from convinced that the proposed workaround will work, either. There are reasons NASA and others do it the way they do. In this case, the best part are many more parts - especially if you want to do regular launches. It is somewhere that over-engineering really would pay off.
*) The Raptor engines just aren't reliable.
Some are excusing the latter with an assumption that they got hit by debris from the pad. Whilst I can imagine some of the early ones failing to that cause; I doubt those that failed after a minute or more was due to that.
They've been regularly losing Raptors on the test stand.
The Telegraph article misses the main reason for the engine failures. The hydraulics…
The SNP’s former Treasurer Colin Beattie has told journalists that he “didn’t know” about the SNP’s motorhome. He was asked: “Did you know about the motorhome purchase and did you sign it off?” He replied: “No, I didn’t know about it.” Mr Beattie then walked away from the group.
He what? That bloody motorhome really is a baffling part of this story. Who, why, where, it's a mess
It is indeed, especially when looked at in the context of the accounts. At the end of the accounting period (in which there is no evidence of the acquisition of such a vehicle) the SNP had access to something like £200k for fighting future campaigns. To spend more than half of that on a motorhome is genuinely inexplicable. Within months of the apparent purchase Mr Murrell makes an (undeclared) loan to the party of almost the exact size as the purchase because the party is suffering "cash flow problems".
The NEC, the deputy leader, the Treasurer, members of the Cabinet and all of the leadership candidates were simply not told of the expenditure of nearly half of the available money. It's completely weird. Its almost as if a small number of people at the top of the party knew that there was plenty of other money available if it was needed which was not reflected in the official accounts.
It's baffling. I thought I understood the original allegation (discussed on here several times over the last 2 years) regarding the SNP independence fund.
The story made sense; the SNP needed cash, it had cash, and at least some people thought they could spend the cash it had. Then Murrell bailed it out, a bit, to stem the damage and/or dissuade donors from raising complaints publicly. The piggy bank would be quietly refilled, only political weirdos would even notice.
But this bus I have no idea about.
Was the motor home in the accounts as a fixed asset?
The fact everyone is going "Huh????" suggests not.
Although....anyone who asked to see those accounts could, but they would have to kill you afterwards.
The accounts are here: https://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Api/Accounts/Documents/24333 In the previous year (2020) the SNP had no vehicles. In 2021 the balance sheet shows vehicles of £80,632. That might be the written down value of the motor home or it may be other things. I mentioned that a rather fancy minibus sat outside an SNP office in Dundee for a couple of years, apparently not moving.
The GOP platform is likely to be as much a problem for them as the choice of candidate.
2024 Republicans run into political buzz saw on abortion https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3967236-2024-republicans-run-into-political-buzz-saw-on-abortion/ Republicans are running into a political buzz saw on abortion, with the party’s presidential candidates facing serious pressure to adopt highly restrictive policies that others in the GOP fear will cost the party the White House next year. Former President Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 GOP nomination, received significant pushback from several high-profile abortion opponent groups last week when his campaign issued a statement suggesting he supported the idea that the issue of abortion should be decided at the state level. Trump sought to defend his record on abortion following the criticism during an event in Iowa, noting the three Supreme Court justices he tapped while in office were ultimately part of the high court’s majority in overturning Roe v. Wade last year. Other potential GOP candidates have taken stricter positions. At a Heritage Foundation event last week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) drew applause from the crowd when he touted signing a six-week abortion ban in his state. Former Vice President Pence has doubled down on his stance on the abortion pill mifepristone — which has been approved by regulators for 23 years — saying this week he wanted to see it “off the market.” ..
I'm not sure about this.
Abortion is very much a wedge issue, and adopting a hard line puts a cap on the Republican vote. This prevented them from winning the House election by high single figures (which is a pretty common margin for the out-party in a mid-term). But they did still win that election by just under 3% of the vote, and that'd be sufficient for them in a Presidential election.
Highly divisive politics is quite grim for those of us of a moderate, pragmatic mindset. But it can work electorally - if you judge the wedge issue well, it doesn't matter if 45% of people (say) hate you, and indeed the hatred in itself works really well in motivating the 45% who love you. It can't really deliver a blowout win, but presidential politics is binary.
It was a winning issue for them; it’s a net negative since Dobbs started to have real world consequences. The true believers want ever more extreme restrictions; the vast majority of the US doesn’t. But the true believers still have an outsize voice in the primaries.
It won’t motivate 45% of the electorate. More like 25%, and demotivate some of the 20% balance.
The problem for Republicans is that it's one of the few areas they can frame themselves as the good guys ("protecting life") while Democrats have a harder job explaining their position. They are trying to get the trans thing as a replacement, but it's just not a common enough issue for people to care. Meanwhile, money in politics, gerrymandering, cutting taxes on the rich, slashing welfare... all of that makes them seem like the assholes.
The GOP platform is likely to be as much a problem for them as the choice of candidate.
2024 Republicans run into political buzz saw on abortion https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3967236-2024-republicans-run-into-political-buzz-saw-on-abortion/ Republicans are running into a political buzz saw on abortion, with the party’s presidential candidates facing serious pressure to adopt highly restrictive policies that others in the GOP fear will cost the party the White House next year. Former President Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 GOP nomination, received significant pushback from several high-profile abortion opponent groups last week when his campaign issued a statement suggesting he supported the idea that the issue of abortion should be decided at the state level. Trump sought to defend his record on abortion following the criticism during an event in Iowa, noting the three Supreme Court justices he tapped while in office were ultimately part of the high court’s majority in overturning Roe v. Wade last year. Other potential GOP candidates have taken stricter positions. At a Heritage Foundation event last week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) drew applause from the crowd when he touted signing a six-week abortion ban in his state. Former Vice President Pence has doubled down on his stance on the abortion pill mifepristone — which has been approved by regulators for 23 years — saying this week he wanted to see it “off the market.” ..
I'm not sure about this.
Abortion is very much a wedge issue, and adopting a hard line puts a cap on the Republican vote. This prevented them from winning the House election by high single figures (which is a pretty common margin for the out-party in a mid-term). But they did still win that election by just under 3% of the vote, and that'd be sufficient for them in a Presidential election.
Highly divisive politics is quite grim for those of us of a moderate, pragmatic mindset. But it can work electorally - if you judge the wedge issue well, it doesn't matter if 45% of people (say) hate you, and indeed the hatred in itself works really well in motivating the 45% who love you. It can't really deliver a blowout win, but presidential politics is binary.
It was a winning issue for them; it’s a net negative since Dobbs started to have real world consequences. The true believers want ever more extreme restrictions; the vast majority of the US doesn’t. But the true believers still have an outsize voice in the primaries.
It won’t motivate 45% of the electorate. More like 25%, and demotivate some of the 20% balance.
Fair point that there are a reasonable number of people for whom it simply isn't that big an issue either way (I suppose we always underestimate the extent of "who cares?" on a lot of issues).
What I question is net impact at the presidential as opposed to congressional level.
I certainly see that it prevented the GOP from winning by high single figures or even more as is pretty common in a mid-term (particularly in the context of Afghanistan withdrawal and a poor economic/energy price backdrop). So instead of a healthy House and Senate majority they have a narrow House majority and the Democrats have the Senate. Dobbs played a big role in that.
But they simply don't need a blowout to win the Presidency. 51/49 is as good as 55/45 or even 60/40 - indeed, the GOP probably don't need a majority of votes. The vote shares in 2022 would have been enough.
The point is it's hard to get a blowout win based on wedge issues unless your opponent is very flawed. But you don't need that in a presidential system. You can afford, if you judge it right, to split the electorate down the middle and be highly divisive. 50%+1 is fine in that system, but isn't in a congressional election.
US aviation authorities suspend Starship launches pending a full accident investigation, which is standard procedure.
The launch pad itself suffered significant damage, and there was more debris kicked up than expected, some of which fell outside the human exclusion zone. Debris from the final explosion, caused by an automated self-destruct ‘flight termination system’ after the first stage failed to achieve its objectives, rained down for hours in the local area off the coast of Texas.
They’re going to have to rebuild the pad, and come up with a much better exhaust suppression system. Which, to be fair, they were planning anyway.
*) The pad system didn't work. Although I await details, I'm far from convinced that the proposed workaround will work, either. There are reasons NASA and others do it the way they do. In this case, the best part are many more parts - especially if you want to do regular launches. It is somewhere that over-engineering really would pay off.
*) The Raptor engines just aren't reliable.
Some are excusing the latter with an assumption that they got hit by debris from the pad. Whilst I can imagine some of the early ones failing to that cause; I doubt those that failed after a minute or more was due to that.
They've been regularly losing Raptors on the test stand.
The Telegraph article misses the main reason for the engine failures. The hydraulics…
We don't know that for sure, do we? It is an assumption.
It lost between six and eleven engines, out of thirty-three. Certainly six. That's a massive amount.
IMV the Raptor engines are not ready for service; IIRC two engines didn't even start on the static fire.
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
I am comfortable with that assessment and it’ll take a lot to move me from it.
It has been said (I forget by whom) that there is an odd circularity in that Biden beats Trump, Trump beats Generic Democrat, Generic Democrat beats DeSantis, and DeSantis beats Biden.
In reality I don't think it is as clear cut as that - any of those contests is close and decided on fine margins. But there is certainly an element of truth in it.
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
US aviation authorities suspend Starship launches pending a full accident investigation, which is standard procedure.
The launch pad itself suffered significant damage, and there was more debris kicked up than expected, some of which fell outside the human exclusion zone. Debris from the final explosion, caused by an automated self-destruct ‘flight termination system’ after the first stage failed to achieve its objectives, rained down for hours in the local area off the coast of Texas.
They’re going to have to rebuild the pad, and come up with a much better exhaust suppression system. Which, to be fair, they were planning anyway.
*) The pad system didn't work. Although I await details, I'm far from convinced that the proposed workaround will work, either. There are reasons NASA and others do it the way they do. In this case, the best part are many more parts - especially if you want to do regular launches. It is somewhere that over-engineering really would pay off.
*) The Raptor engines just aren't reliable.
Some are excusing the latter with an assumption that they got hit by debris from the pad. Whilst I can imagine some of the early ones failing to that cause; I doubt those that failed after a minute or more was due to that.
They've been regularly losing Raptors on the test stand.
The Telegraph article misses the main reason for the engine failures. The hydraulics…
We don't know that for sure, do we? It is an assumption.
It lost between six and eleven engines, out of thirty-three. Certainly six. That's a massive amount.
IMV the Raptor engines are not ready for service; IIRC two engines didn't even start on the static fire.
We don't know why, though. The engines themselves might be more reliable than that.
The GOP platform is likely to be as much a problem for them as the choice of candidate.
2024 Republicans run into political buzz saw on abortion https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3967236-2024-republicans-run-into-political-buzz-saw-on-abortion/ Republicans are running into a political buzz saw on abortion, with the party’s presidential candidates facing serious pressure to adopt highly restrictive policies that others in the GOP fear will cost the party the White House next year. Former President Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 GOP nomination, received significant pushback from several high-profile abortion opponent groups last week when his campaign issued a statement suggesting he supported the idea that the issue of abortion should be decided at the state level. Trump sought to defend his record on abortion following the criticism during an event in Iowa, noting the three Supreme Court justices he tapped while in office were ultimately part of the high court’s majority in overturning Roe v. Wade last year. Other potential GOP candidates have taken stricter positions. At a Heritage Foundation event last week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) drew applause from the crowd when he touted signing a six-week abortion ban in his state. Former Vice President Pence has doubled down on his stance on the abortion pill mifepristone — which has been approved by regulators for 23 years — saying this week he wanted to see it “off the market.” ..
I'm not sure about this.
Abortion is very much a wedge issue, and adopting a hard line puts a cap on the Republican vote. This prevented them from winning the House election by high single figures (which is a pretty common margin for the out-party in a mid-term). But they did still win that election by just under 3% of the vote, and that'd be sufficient for them in a Presidential election.
Highly divisive politics is quite grim for those of us of a moderate, pragmatic mindset. But it can work electorally - if you judge the wedge issue well, it doesn't matter if 45% of people (say) hate you, and indeed the hatred in itself works really well in motivating the 45% who love you. It can't really deliver a blowout win, but presidential politics is binary.
It was a winning issue for them; it’s a net negative since Dobbs started to have real world consequences. The true believers want ever more extreme restrictions; the vast majority of the US doesn’t. But the true believers still have an outsize voice in the primaries.
It won’t motivate 45% of the electorate. More like 25%, and demotivate some of the 20% balance.
In which case, sell Trump as he's not an abortion hardliner?
Trump will promise whatever he needs to get the nomination, so don't assume that. It's more likely his criminal trial entanglements that stop him.
The GOP platform is likely to be as much a problem for them as the choice of candidate.
2024 Republicans run into political buzz saw on abortion https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3967236-2024-republicans-run-into-political-buzz-saw-on-abortion/ Republicans are running into a political buzz saw on abortion, with the party’s presidential candidates facing serious pressure to adopt highly restrictive policies that others in the GOP fear will cost the party the White House next year. Former President Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 GOP nomination, received significant pushback from several high-profile abortion opponent groups last week when his campaign issued a statement suggesting he supported the idea that the issue of abortion should be decided at the state level. Trump sought to defend his record on abortion following the criticism during an event in Iowa, noting the three Supreme Court justices he tapped while in office were ultimately part of the high court’s majority in overturning Roe v. Wade last year. Other potential GOP candidates have taken stricter positions. At a Heritage Foundation event last week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) drew applause from the crowd when he touted signing a six-week abortion ban in his state. Former Vice President Pence has doubled down on his stance on the abortion pill mifepristone — which has been approved by regulators for 23 years — saying this week he wanted to see it “off the market.” ..
I'm not sure about this.
Abortion is very much a wedge issue, and adopting a hard line puts a cap on the Republican vote. This prevented them from winning the House election by high single figures (which is a pretty common margin for the out-party in a mid-term). But they did still win that election by just under 3% of the vote, and that'd be sufficient for them in a Presidential election.
Highly divisive politics is quite grim for those of us of a moderate, pragmatic mindset. But it can work electorally - if you judge the wedge issue well, it doesn't matter if 45% of people (say) hate you, and indeed the hatred in itself works really well in motivating the 45% who love you. It can't really deliver a blowout win, but presidential politics is binary.
It was a winning issue for them; it’s a net negative since Dobbs started to have real world consequences. The true believers want ever more extreme restrictions; the vast majority of the US doesn’t. But the true believers still have an outsize voice in the primaries.
It won’t motivate 45% of the electorate. More like 25%, and demotivate some of the 20% balance.
The problem for Republicans is that it's one of the few areas they can frame themselves as the good guys ("protecting life") while Democrats have a harder job explaining their position. They are trying to get the trans thing as a replacement, but it's just not a common enough issue for people to care. Meanwhile, money in politics, gerrymandering, cutting taxes on the rich, slashing welfare... all of that makes them seem like the assholes.
It doesn't work like that now Dobbs is law. The "good guys" are forcing women to the brink of death before they are allowed procedures which might save their life.
The balance of those strongly motivated by the issue has shifted.
1,400 UK military personnel now involved in Sudan rescue effort, including 120 dropped this morning at Khartoum airbase. New DPM Oliver Dowden to chair COBRA meeting this afternoon.
Advise changed for British nationals, they are now to make their way to the airport if possible.
I am comfortable with that assessment and it’ll take a lot to move me from it.
It has been said (I forget by whom) that there is an odd circularity in that Biden beats Trump, Trump beats Generic Democrat, Generic Democrat beats DeSantis, and DeSantis beats Biden.
In reality I don't think it is as clear cut as that - any of those contests is close and decided on fine margins. But there is certainly an element of truth in it.
You are of course right that it is more nuanced than I am making out. But I think the mantra you mention there is quite a good rule of thumb.
@nytimes Breaking News: Harry Belafonte, the barrier-breaking singer, actor and activist who became a major force in the civil rights movement, has died at 96. nyti.ms/444e0xM
Sky showing we are using 51.5% gas and just 23.7% renewables just now, no doubt as I look from our balcony to the Gwynt y Mor offshore wind farm they are barely turning and I assume other wind farms across the UK are the same
My car needed defrosting this morning and it’s nearly May!
Frosts in the North East can happen well into May.
Always plant my humble tomatoes and bedding plants out on the last bank holiday in May.
My car was also covered in frost this morning and there was some hail yesterday evening. This is a cold spring.
Interesting, although I see your data is for central England rather than Scotland. I would say, subjectively, it has been colder and drier than normal this year.
I know someone who'd shown that central England Temperature anomalies were a pretty good proxy for Northern European temperature anomalies.
Though I should point out that the anomalies in the link are compared to 1961-90. Present-day averages are at least 1C higher and something of a moving target. So, you can probably say that April has been a little bit colder than what passes for normal these days, but it's not a patch on the couple of cold springs we've had in the last decade (I think 2013 and 2017 were most notable from memory).
2018 was Beast from the East year.
That wasn't a cold spring though - it was February so very much winter.
Although it might also have been a cold-ish Spring. From memory of the local elections that year, it was unusually variable and I recall delivering leaflets in the snow and in very hot weather within a couple of weeks.
Beast from the East was March (second week?). Followed by a second great dump of snow, a week later, also in March.
Googling it, it was last week of February, just into March with, as you say, a second mini-wave a fortnight later. So closer to spring than I'd remembered, but nevertheless still winter.
As I say, my recollection is there were some incredibly hot days in April that year over the local election campaign, and election day itself was baking.
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Rather difficult to enforce.....
Wouldn’t it be simpler to pay the whole costs of training (fees and a living grant) to all trainee doctors with a contract that they have to work for x number of years in the NHS (with an allowance to spend a year working abroad for extra relevant experience) otherwise they are then liable for the costs.
If Australia wants to pinch them then that’s fine but the transferring doctor is going to need to ask the Australian recruiters to pay their training costs off.
Not only does this open up medical schools to anyone who otherwise couldn’t afford or was too scared of the cost but also if we lose doctors overseas we get the money back to go back into the training pot.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
It would have been better if Chorley had let him speak.
Not a big Matt Chorley fan, but I think he got it about right.
Chomsky speaks with great certainty and authority, such that people tend to believe him. He does need a bit of "nope, that's just not true" to prick the bubble. That's also true of him as an academic, where he's certainly more knowledgeable than he is as a political pundit, but equally adamant where he has limited justification for being so.
Chomsky's a nasty piece of work in my view. He has a fan-base and is quite often right on academic matters - but he is so vile and belittling to people who disagree... his academic articles are uncomfortable reading at times as there is a hell of a lot of very hard punching down towards very much junior (but capable) academics.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
It would have been better if Chorley had let him speak.
Not a big Matt Chorley fan, but I think he got it about right.
Chomsky speaks with great certainty and authority, such that people tend to believe him. He does need a bit of "nope, that's just not true" to prick the bubble. That's also true of him as an academic, where he's certainly more knowledgeable than he is as a political pundit, but equally adamant where he has limited justification for being so.
Chomsky's a nasty piece of work in my view. He has a fan-base and is quite often right on academic matters - but he is so vile and belittling to people who disagree... his academic articles are uncomfortable reading at times as there is a hell of a lot of very hard punching down towards very much junior (but capable) academics.
He was always an ideologue rather than a scientist. Now he's just embarrassing - though you have to make some allowance for his being 95.
Found a working Calmac ferry. MV LOTI, launched 1989.
Is that Mallaig? Been a long time, so I can't quite work it out.
I'd go for Oban, with the terminal off to the left.
Looks like a perfect day for a cruise down the Sound of Mull, unless just heading for Craignure.
Ah yes, could well be right. Been even longer since I've been on a boat at Oban and then arriving (from Lochboisdale). That's a nice trip in good weather, which it was.
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
Yes.
What about people who have gained valuable experience in the UK such as armed forces, civil servants, teachers or financiers? Shouldn't they all pay a tax to get their exit visa too?
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
I really do. I have basically and voluntarily locked myself in this hotel for two-three weeks, to finish a long term project. My food is delivered, my laundry is delivered, my female company is delivered, my only modest solace is this rooftop bar and the Tanqueray. Then back to work
Justice Gorsuch was trying to sell a 40-acre property for 2 years.
9 days after his confirmation, he sold it & didn't disclose the buyer –– the CEO of a law firm that's since had 22 cases with business before SCOTUS.
Unbelievable.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/25/neil-gorsuch-colorado-property-sale-00093579 ...Nine days after he was confirmed by the Senate for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, the then-circuit court judge got one: The chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one of the nation’s biggest law firms with a robust practice before the high court. Gorsuch owned the property with two other individuals...
...Gorsuch did not disclose the identity of the purchaser. That box was left blank.
Since then, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court, according to a POLITICO review of the court’s docket.
They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties.
That he didn't recuse himself on those cases is as obvious a breach of judicial ethics as you can imagine.
The Supreme Court justices are basically saying they don't hold themselves to a lower set of standards than is expected of every other judge.
US aviation authorities suspend Starship launches pending a full accident investigation, which is standard procedure.
The launch pad itself suffered significant damage, and there was more debris kicked up than expected, some of which fell outside the human exclusion zone. Debris from the final explosion, caused by an automated self-destruct ‘flight termination system’ after the first stage failed to achieve its objectives, rained down for hours in the local area off the coast of Texas.
They’re going to have to rebuild the pad, and come up with a much better exhaust suppression system. Which, to be fair, they were planning anyway.
*) The pad system didn't work. Although I await details, I'm far from convinced that the proposed workaround will work, either. There are reasons NASA and others do it the way they do. In this case, the best part are many more parts - especially if you want to do regular launches. It is somewhere that over-engineering really would pay off.
*) The Raptor engines just aren't reliable.
Some are excusing the latter with an assumption that they got hit by debris from the pad. Whilst I can imagine some of the early ones failing to that cause; I doubt those that failed after a minute or more was due to that.
They've been regularly losing Raptors on the test stand.
The Telegraph article misses the main reason for the engine failures. The hydraulics…
We don't know that for sure, do we? It is an assumption.
It lost between six and eleven engines, out of thirty-three. Certainly six. That's a massive amount.
IMV the Raptor engines are not ready for service; IIRC two engines didn't even start on the static fire.
We don't know why, though. The engines themselves might be more reliable than that.
The engines *might* be more reliable than that; but they've been losing some on the test stand this year. The excuse of "They're testing the engine's limits!" seems feeble when they lost so many on the rocket as well.
I reckon Raptor 2's have got significant issues - were they even at full power during launch, given there was no payload?
Still, the big issue is the pad. I'm unsure how they'll fix that, but it's a heck of a lot of energy to dissipate.
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
Yes.
Why limit this to graduates?
Anyone who has received free state education should be banned from working abroad.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
I really do. I have basically and voluntarily locked myself in this hotel for two-three weeks, to finish a long term project. My food is delivered, my laundry is delivered, my female company is delivered, my only modest solace is this rooftop bar and the Tanqueray. Then back to work
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
On this occasion I think Leon has it right! I only wish I could get to Bangkok again.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
I really do. I have basically and voluntarily locked myself in this hotel for two-three weeks, to finish a long term project. My food is delivered, my laundry is delivered, my female company is delivered, my only modest solace is this rooftop bar and the Tanqueray. Then back to work
US aviation authorities suspend Starship launches pending a full accident investigation, which is standard procedure.
The launch pad itself suffered significant damage, and there was more debris kicked up than expected, some of which fell outside the human exclusion zone. Debris from the final explosion, caused by an automated self-destruct ‘flight termination system’ after the first stage failed to achieve its objectives, rained down for hours in the local area off the coast of Texas.
They’re going to have to rebuild the pad, and come up with a much better exhaust suppression system. Which, to be fair, they were planning anyway.
*) The pad system didn't work. Although I await details, I'm far from convinced that the proposed workaround will work, either. There are reasons NASA and others do it the way they do. In this case, the best part are many more parts - especially if you want to do regular launches. It is somewhere that over-engineering really would pay off.
*) The Raptor engines just aren't reliable.
Some are excusing the latter with an assumption that they got hit by debris from the pad. Whilst I can imagine some of the early ones failing to that cause; I doubt those that failed after a minute or more was due to that.
They've been regularly losing Raptors on the test stand.
The Telegraph article misses the main reason for the engine failures. The hydraulics…
We don't know that for sure, do we? It is an assumption.
It lost between six and eleven engines, out of thirty-three. Certainly six. That's a massive amount.
IMV the Raptor engines are not ready for service; IIRC two engines didn't even start on the static fire.
We don't know why, though. The engines themselves might be more reliable than that.
The engines *might* be more reliable than that; but they've been losing some on the test stand this year. The excuse of "They're testing the engine's limits!" seems feeble when they lost so many on the rocket as well.
I reckon Raptor 2's have got significant issues - were they even at full power during launch, given there was no payload?
..
I've no idea. But it was interesting that the failures were very far from randomly distributed among the engines. That might just be coincidence, but it possibly suggests something about how they are plumbed in (to put it very crudely).
The GOP platform is likely to be as much a problem for them as the choice of candidate.
2024 Republicans run into political buzz saw on abortion https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3967236-2024-republicans-run-into-political-buzz-saw-on-abortion/ Republicans are running into a political buzz saw on abortion, with the party’s presidential candidates facing serious pressure to adopt highly restrictive policies that others in the GOP fear will cost the party the White House next year. Former President Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 GOP nomination, received significant pushback from several high-profile abortion opponent groups last week when his campaign issued a statement suggesting he supported the idea that the issue of abortion should be decided at the state level. Trump sought to defend his record on abortion following the criticism during an event in Iowa, noting the three Supreme Court justices he tapped while in office were ultimately part of the high court’s majority in overturning Roe v. Wade last year. Other potential GOP candidates have taken stricter positions. At a Heritage Foundation event last week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) drew applause from the crowd when he touted signing a six-week abortion ban in his state. Former Vice President Pence has doubled down on his stance on the abortion pill mifepristone — which has been approved by regulators for 23 years — saying this week he wanted to see it “off the market.” ..
I'm not sure about this.
Abortion is very much a wedge issue, and adopting a hard line puts a cap on the Republican vote. This prevented them from winning the House election by high single figures (which is a pretty common margin for the out-party in a mid-term). But they did still win that election by just under 3% of the vote, and that'd be sufficient for them in a Presidential election.
Highly divisive politics is quite grim for those of us of a moderate, pragmatic mindset. But it can work electorally - if you judge the wedge issue well, it doesn't matter if 45% of people (say) hate you, and indeed the hatred in itself works really well in motivating the 45% who love you. It can't really deliver a blowout win, but presidential politics is binary.
It was a winning issue for them; it’s a net negative since Dobbs started to have real world consequences. The true believers want ever more extreme restrictions; the vast majority of the US doesn’t. But the true believers still have an outsize voice in the primaries.
It won’t motivate 45% of the electorate. More like 25%, and demotivate some of the 20% balance.
Fair point that there are a reasonable number of people for whom it simply isn't that big an issue either way (I suppose we always underestimate the extent of "who cares?" on a lot of issues).
What I question is net impact at the presidential as opposed to congressional level.
I certainly see that it prevented the GOP from winning by high single figures or even more as is pretty common in a mid-term (particularly in the context of Afghanistan withdrawal and a poor economic/energy price backdrop). So instead of a healthy House and Senate majority they have a narrow House majority and the Democrats have the Senate. Dobbs played a big role in that.
But they simply don't need a blowout to win the Presidency. 51/49 is as good as 55/45 or even 60/40 - indeed, the GOP probably don't need a majority of votes. The vote shares in 2022 would have been enough.
The point is it's hard to get a blowout win based on wedge issues unless your opponent is very flawed. But you don't need that in a presidential system. You can afford, if you judge it right, to split the electorate down the middle and be highly divisive. 50%+1 is fine in that system, but isn't in a congressional election.
I think the point is that before Dobbs a lot of people were happy enough with the status quo, and the issue wasn't enough to make them vote a certain way because they thought there was some kind of constitutional protection for some kind of access to abortion, whereas the 20% (say) minority of voters who were very strongly against abortion were willing to go out and vote for the most hardline anti-abortion candidate they could find. So it was a net vote-winner for Republicans. Now the status quo has changed, people who favour reasonable access to abortion know that they will actually have to vote for it, and it looks plausible that being hardline anti-abortion is going to be a net vote-loser for Republicans (though still maybe a vote winner in primaries).
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Rather difficult to enforce.....
Wouldn’t it be simpler to pay the whole costs of training (fees and a living grant) to all trainee doctors with a contract that they have to work for x number of years in the NHS (with an allowance to spend a year working abroad for extra relevant experience) otherwise they are then liable for the costs.
If Australia wants to pinch them then that’s fine but the transferring doctor is going to need to ask the Australian recruiters to pay their training costs off.
Not only does this open up medical schools to anyone who otherwise couldn’t afford or was too scared of the cost but also if we lose doctors overseas we get the money back to go back into the training pot.
Agreed. But you're still going to have to pay a fairly decent rate in the early years, or you'll see your best students deciding to train overseas and stay there.
US aviation authorities suspend Starship launches pending a full accident investigation, which is standard procedure.
The launch pad itself suffered significant damage, and there was more debris kicked up than expected, some of which fell outside the human exclusion zone. Debris from the final explosion, caused by an automated self-destruct ‘flight termination system’ after the first stage failed to achieve its objectives, rained down for hours in the local area off the coast of Texas.
They’re going to have to rebuild the pad, and come up with a much better exhaust suppression system. Which, to be fair, they were planning anyway.
*) The pad system didn't work. Although I await details, I'm far from convinced that the proposed workaround will work, either. There are reasons NASA and others do it the way they do. In this case, the best part are many more parts - especially if you want to do regular launches. It is somewhere that over-engineering really would pay off.
*) The Raptor engines just aren't reliable.
Some are excusing the latter with an assumption that they got hit by debris from the pad. Whilst I can imagine some of the early ones failing to that cause; I doubt those that failed after a minute or more was due to that.
They've been regularly losing Raptors on the test stand.
The Telegraph article misses the main reason for the engine failures. The hydraulics…
We don't know that for sure, do we? It is an assumption.
It lost between six and eleven engines, out of thirty-three. Certainly six. That's a massive amount.
IMV the Raptor engines are not ready for service; IIRC two engines didn't even start on the static fire.
We don't know why, though. The engines themselves might be more reliable than that.
The engines *might* be more reliable than that; but they've been losing some on the test stand this year. The excuse of "They're testing the engine's limits!" seems feeble when they lost so many on the rocket as well.
I reckon Raptor 2's have got significant issues - were they even at full power during launch, given there was no payload?
..
I've no idea. But it was interesting that the failures were very far from randomly distributed among the engines. That might just be coincidence, but it possibly suggests something about how they are plumbed in (to put it very crudely).
Likely resulting from the pad damage. There were large chunks of concrete flying off in all sorts of directions, and the vehicle was held on the pad for about six seconds as the engines spooled up. Presumably, as this was a prototype first stage, they had even more sensors than usual on it, which will in due course give us the details of how the failures occurred.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
I really do. I have basically and voluntarily locked myself in this hotel for two-three weeks, to finish a long term project. My food is delivered, my laundry is delivered, my female company is delivered, my only modest solace is this rooftop bar and the Tanqueray. Then back to work
But soon I shall be free…..
Free
FREE I TELL YOU. FREEEEEEEEE
"my female company is delivered."
That sounds... icky.
Or self dramatisation. He is a writer of fictions.
Justice Gorsuch was trying to sell a 40-acre property for 2 years.
9 days after his confirmation, he sold it & didn't disclose the buyer –– the CEO of a law firm that's since had 22 cases with business before SCOTUS.
Unbelievable.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/25/neil-gorsuch-colorado-property-sale-00093579 ...Nine days after he was confirmed by the Senate for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, the then-circuit court judge got one: The chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one of the nation’s biggest law firms with a robust practice before the high court. Gorsuch owned the property with two other individuals...
...Gorsuch did not disclose the identity of the purchaser. That box was left blank.
Since then, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court, according to a POLITICO review of the court’s docket.
They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties.
That he didn't recuse himself on those cases is as obvious a breach of judicial ethics as you can imagine.
The Supreme Court justices are basically saying they don't hold themselves to a lower set of standards than is expected of every other judge.
I've never been more overcharged for legal work than by GT.
With that said...
(a) how much were Gorsuch's proceeds from the sale? (b) was the property sold at market rates?
This is also nowhere near as egregious as the Thomas case, as that was both well above market rates AND Thomas's mother continued to live in the house.
So Biden is currently aged 80. If he wins the race to be re-elected, he will stand down on Jan 20th, 2029, aged 86. Can’t help thinking it’s the wrong call, but there does appear to be something of a dearth of talent at the top of his party. And the other party.
I'm not actually sure there really is a dearth of talent in either party - there are several credible Senators, Governors, and cabinet members who might not all survive the hard kicking of the tyres provided by a primary process, but on paper are the equivalent of major party nominees of the past.
Ultimately, Biden promised to be a "bridge to the future" but is enjoying it too much and has become a bed-blocker. I don't mind him, but that's the reality.
I think he's doing quite well, and is evidence for the case that a veteran Senator is a good choice for President as he knows how to work the system. He stumbles and misspeaks occasionally, but if that's the worst he can do, we can live with that.
Sure, one can make observations about what people in their 80s are on average like. But like all average they can obscure rather than illuminate. He's a moderate chap who is a good operator. They could do much worse, and may yet do so.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
I really do. I have basically and voluntarily locked myself in this hotel for two-three weeks, to finish a long term project. My food is delivered, my laundry is delivered, my female company is delivered, my only modest solace is this rooftop bar and the Tanqueray. Then back to work
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
Perhaps we could make a start by charging all those students with dual nationality the going foreigner rate?
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
Justice Gorsuch was trying to sell a 40-acre property for 2 years.
9 days after his confirmation, he sold it & didn't disclose the buyer –– the CEO of a law firm that's since had 22 cases with business before SCOTUS.
Unbelievable.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/25/neil-gorsuch-colorado-property-sale-00093579 ...Nine days after he was confirmed by the Senate for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, the then-circuit court judge got one: The chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one of the nation’s biggest law firms with a robust practice before the high court. Gorsuch owned the property with two other individuals...
...Gorsuch did not disclose the identity of the purchaser. That box was left blank.
Since then, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court, according to a POLITICO review of the court’s docket.
They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties.
That he didn't recuse himself on those cases is as obvious a breach of judicial ethics as you can imagine.
The Supreme Court justices are basically saying they don't hold themselves to a lower set of standards than is expected of every other judge.
I've never been more overcharged for legal work than by GT.
With that said...
(a) how much were Gorsuch's proceeds from the sale? (b) was the property sold at market rates?
This is also nowhere near as egregious as the Thomas case, as that was both well above market rates AND Thomas's mother continued to live in the house.
It certainly is, since the purchaser was a law firm regularly arguing cases before the court, buying it almost immediately after he was confirmed. The amount of money (several hundred k) isn't the issue. It is the failure to recuse, which ought to be clear to a first year law student.
In both cases, it ought to be a pretty bright line between what is acceptable as a judge, and what isn't. We're not talking about politicians, even if they behave as such.
Also, Gorsuch, while an extremist, isn't completely unmoored from judicial principle in the way Thomas quite obviously has been for many years.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
On this occasion I think Leon has it right! I only wish I could get to Bangkok again.
i wish you the best of luck in getting out here
Thankfully, the truly hideous heat has abated, somewhat, and it is all much more tolerable. The evenings are soft and sweet, again, rather than baking and humid. The pollution has cleared as well
And Bangkok has the amazing energy, still, if not even more than before. I was just in the Food Court at the basement of Siam Paragon - about 90 hectares of thousands of people eating every cuisine in the world, and doing it noisily, happily, enjoyably (because the food is GOOD). Across the city the bars are full, the whisky pop ups are back, the cocktail VW combis with dancing tattooed ladyboys are back, the squid sellers in their carts trundle the streets, behind the blind accordion players and the hi society Chinese women in their limos, it’s as sensational as city as it ever was, and yet more skyscrapers rise even as I speak
There is no sense the Great Asian Boom is over, quite the opposite. Asia is still overtaking the west. No western city, not NYC, London, Paris, Rome, Berlin, LA (lol), anywhere, has the sheer vivacity and exuberance of Bangkok
The question is can two men over the age of 75 maintain an election for the next 18 months or so.
What is dismaying about Trump is how energetic he is. Not much sign of him slowing down. And little evidence of physical frailty. He seems energised by crowds and campaigning. So I dont think being a candidate will be a problem for him. Unfortunately.
Justice Gorsuch was trying to sell a 40-acre property for 2 years.
9 days after his confirmation, he sold it & didn't disclose the buyer –– the CEO of a law firm that's since had 22 cases with business before SCOTUS.
Unbelievable.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/25/neil-gorsuch-colorado-property-sale-00093579 ...Nine days after he was confirmed by the Senate for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, the then-circuit court judge got one: The chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one of the nation’s biggest law firms with a robust practice before the high court. Gorsuch owned the property with two other individuals...
...Gorsuch did not disclose the identity of the purchaser. That box was left blank.
Since then, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court, according to a POLITICO review of the court’s docket.
They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties.
That he didn't recuse himself on those cases is as obvious a breach of judicial ethics as you can imagine.
The Supreme Court justices are basically saying they don't hold themselves to a lower set of standards than is expected of every other judge.
I've never been more overcharged for legal work than by GT.
With that said...
(a) how much were Gorsuch's proceeds from the sale? (b) was the property sold at market rates?
This is also nowhere near as egregious as the Thomas case, as that was both well above market rates AND Thomas's mother continued to live in the house.
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
Yes.
Why limit this to graduates?
Anyone who has received free state education should be banned from working abroad.
I'm not talking about banning people going abroad. I am suggesting that they repay the state the money that it has spent on their education. As they are not responsible for the decisions made as children, they cannot be charged for the pre-16 expenditure. However, post-16 expenditure is fair game.
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
Ford, Carter and Trump all duds. Bush Snr caught out by economy and a genius campaigner in Clinton. Think Biden should be Ok.
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
On this occasion I think Leon has it right! I only wish I could get to Bangkok again.
i wish you the best of luck in getting out here
Thankfully, the truly hideous heat has abated, somewhat, and it is all much more tolerable. The evenings are soft and sweet, again, rather than baking and humid. The pollution has cleared as well
And Bangkok has the amazing energy, still, if not even more than before. I was just in the Food Court at the basement of Siam Paragon - about 90 hectares of thousands of people eating every cuisine in the world, and doing it noisily, happily, enjoyably (because the food is GOOD). Across the city the bars are full, the whisky pop ups are back, the cocktail VW combis with dancing tattooed ladyboys are back, the squid sellers in their carts trundle the streets, behind the blind accordion players and the hi society Chinese women in their limos, it’s as sensational as city as it ever was, and yet more skyscrapers rise even as I speak
There is no sense the Great Asian Boom is over, quite the opposite. Asia is still overtaking the west. No western city, not NYC, London, Paris, Rome, Berlin, LA (lol), anywhere, has the sheer vivacity and exuberance of Bangkok
Nor, thank God, the pollution, humidity, mosquitoes, sprawl and general squalor.
Bangkok is the worst part of Thailand - best to head to the hills, beaches or islands asap.
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
The third in Tim Shipman's "Out" trilogy after "Fall Out" and "All Out War", unimaginatively called "Out", is being released in hardback in May23 and in paperback in May24. The poor among us can get it from your local library. You can order it in Waterstones or those newfangled online sellers. Read it or be square, daddy-o.
Justice Gorsuch was trying to sell a 40-acre property for 2 years.
9 days after his confirmation, he sold it & didn't disclose the buyer –– the CEO of a law firm that's since had 22 cases with business before SCOTUS.
Unbelievable.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/25/neil-gorsuch-colorado-property-sale-00093579 ...Nine days after he was confirmed by the Senate for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, the then-circuit court judge got one: The chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one of the nation’s biggest law firms with a robust practice before the high court. Gorsuch owned the property with two other individuals...
...Gorsuch did not disclose the identity of the purchaser. That box was left blank.
Since then, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court, according to a POLITICO review of the court’s docket.
They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties.
That he didn't recuse himself on those cases is as obvious a breach of judicial ethics as you can imagine.
The Supreme Court justices are basically saying they don't hold themselves to a lower set of standards than is expected of every other judge.
I've never been more overcharged for legal work than by GT.
With that said...
(a) how much were Gorsuch's proceeds from the sale? (b) was the property sold at market rates?
This is also nowhere near as egregious as the Thomas case, as that was both well above market rates AND Thomas's mother continued to live in the house.
It certainly is, since the purchaser was a law firm regularly arguing cases before the court, buying it almost immediately after he was confirmed. The amount of money (several hundred k) isn't the issue. It is the failure to recuse, which ought to be clear to a first year law student.
In both cases, it ought to be a pretty bright line between what is acceptable as a judge, and what isn't. We're not talking about politicians, even if they behave as such.
Also, Gorsuch, while an extremist, isn't completely unmoored from judicial principle in the way Thomas quite obviously has been for many years.
But if he paid market rate, then the actual benefit to Gorsuch will have been almost non-existent.
In addition, property sales take time. It's entirely possible thar the sale was agreed even before Scalia died.
Last point: GT has no political axe to grind, they are guns for hire.
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Polling 14% with whom? Isn’t a rabid anti-vaxxer more likely to to appeal to the Trumpite end of the market?
So he is the anti-vaxxer?
Yeah he’s quite out there
However i think the wider point is good. I reckon Biden is seriously vulnerably to a black horse Dem candidate, probably more than any sitting president in recent history, who is seeking a second term. He is just TOO old, and he ain’t that popular
RFK maybe not, But someone else?
I have not focused enough on US Democrat politics to have any idea if there are feasible names out there - perhaps as black horses that’s bound to be true
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
Son of Bobby Kennedy, so US royalty but yes he is unlikely to do well given his anti vax views.
However last time an incumbent US President faced a significant primary challenge, Carter in 1980, it was also from a Kennedy, Senator Ted Kennedy. Kennedy ran Carter close and Carter went on to lose the general election to Reagan
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
Yes.
Why limit this to graduates?
Anyone who has received free state education should be banned from working abroad.
I'm not talking about banning people going abroad. I am suggesting that they repay the state the money that it has spent on their education. As they are not responsible for the decisions made as children, they cannot be charged for the pre-16 expenditure. However, post-16 expenditure is fair game.
Moving abroad does not exempt you from re-paying your student loans. It would however do so for a graduate tax.
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
Titbit, not tidbit. Bettor is American too, come to think of it. You are filtering posts through ChatGPT AICMFP.
In what way is National insurance not a tax - most tax avoidance schemes focus more on avoiding NI than avoiding income tax.
The clue is in the title.
The clue is in what it is and not its title. In what way is it not a tax? Not having the word tax in the name is the least impressive way of deciding it's not a tax. If government thought the population were that gullible they would be renaming lots of taxes and not include the word tax.
What do you think the treasury does with the money?
It is effectively a group insurance policy that pays out when someone is sick or on maternity leave and covers as payment towards state pension.
No it isn't. Honestly @squareroot2 I had you down as someone who was cynical. I'm glad to see there is a more trusting side to you, but you shouldn't believe that sort of propaganda. None of NI is ring fenced for those things. It all goes into a great big bucket of money that is spent on anything.
That is it is a tax just like Income tax, or Vat or IHT or CGT, etc, etc. The government doesn't even pretend it is ring fenced.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
On this occasion I think Leon has it right! I only wish I could get to Bangkok again.
i wish you the best of luck in getting out here
Thankfully, the truly hideous heat has abated, somewhat, and it is all much more tolerable. The evenings are soft and sweet, again, rather than baking and humid. The pollution has cleared as well
And Bangkok has the amazing energy, still, if not even more than before. I was just in the Food Court at the basement of Siam Paragon - about 90 hectares of thousands of people eating every cuisine in the world, and doing it noisily, happily, enjoyably (because the food is GOOD). Across the city the bars are full, the whisky pop ups are back, the cocktail VW combis with dancing tattooed ladyboys are back, the squid sellers in their carts trundle the streets, behind the blind accordion players and the hi society Chinese women in their limos, it’s as sensational as city as it ever was, and yet more skyscrapers rise even as I speak
There is no sense the Great Asian Boom is over, quite the opposite. Asia is still overtaking the west. No western city, not NYC, London, Paris, Rome, Berlin, LA (lol), anywhere, has the sheer vivacity and exuberance of Bangkok
Nor, thank God, the pollution, humidity, mosquitoes, sprawl and general squalor.
Bangkok is the worst part of Thailand - best to head to the hills, beaches or islands asap.
Absolute bollocks
If you love the hedonistic pleasures of great cities - food, wine, fun, sex, bars, weird people, orgies, meeting Nick Palmer in a sauna, spectacular strangeness - Bangkok is fabulous. Anyone who says otherwise is a twat, or just a slower lower-watt type who likes sitting on a mountain
Fair enough. Mountains can be fun. But so can cities. And Bangkok is brilliant for fun
Janan Ganesh captured it well in the FT last summer, and it has only got livelier since then
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
Son of Bobby Kennedy, so US royalty but yes he is unlikely to do well given his anti vax views.
However last time an incumbent US President faced a significant primary challenge, Carter in 1980, it was also from a Kennedy, Senator Ted Kennedy. Kennedy ran Carter close and Carter went on to lose the general election to Reagan
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
Titbit, not tidbit. Bettor is American too, come to think of it. You are filtering posts through ChatGPT AICMFP.
Bettor is better than better because it distinguishes a bettor from better
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
Kennedy's an idiot or a conman, or probably both. Yuk.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
TBH I don’t even know who RFK is. Is he the anti vaxxer?
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
Son of Bobby Kennedy, so US royalty but yes he is unlikely to do well given his anti vax views.
However last time an incumbent US President faced a significant primary challenge, Carter in 1980, it was also from a Kennedy, Senator Ted Kennedy. Kennedy ran Carter close and Carter went on to lose the general election to Reagan
Yebbut - antivax is a bit complicated. There are remnants of hardcore DEM antivaxxery stemming largely from the fact that Trump was in power when the vaccine was developed.
As a man of advanced years, I have to say there are few greater pleasures than sitting in a rooftop bar in Bangkok, under the tropic stars, sipping a splendid Tanqueray 10 and tonic, and reading about the SNP fucking up YET AGAIN
You need to get out more.
On this occasion I think Leon has it right! I only wish I could get to Bangkok again.
i wish you the best of luck in getting out here
Thankfully, the truly hideous heat has abated, somewhat, and it is all much more tolerable. The evenings are soft and sweet, again, rather than baking and humid. The pollution has cleared as well
And Bangkok has the amazing energy, still, if not even more than before. I was just in the Food Court at the basement of Siam Paragon - about 90 hectares of thousands of people eating every cuisine in the world, and doing it noisily, happily, enjoyably (because the food is GOOD). Across the city the bars are full, the whisky pop ups are back, the cocktail VW combis with dancing tattooed ladyboys are back, the squid sellers in their carts trundle the streets, behind the blind accordion players and the hi society Chinese women in their limos, it’s as sensational as city as it ever was, and yet more skyscrapers rise even as I speak
There is no sense the Great Asian Boom is over, quite the opposite. Asia is still overtaking the west. No western city, not NYC, London, Paris, Rome, Berlin, LA (lol), anywhere, has the sheer vivacity and exuberance of Bangkok
Nor, thank God, the pollution, humidity, mosquitoes, sprawl and general squalor.
Bangkok is the worst part of Thailand - best to head to the hills, beaches or islands asap.
If you love the hedonistic pleasures of great cities - food, wine, fun, sex, bars, weird people, orgies, meeting Nick Palmer in a sauna, spectacular strangeness - Bangkok is fabulous.
Does "hedonistic" mean "depraved"? Not convinced that I am cut out for so many hedonistic pleasures....
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
Yes.
Why limit this to graduates?
Anyone who has received free state education should be banned from working abroad.
I'm not talking about banning people going abroad. I am suggesting that they repay the state the money that it has spent on their education. As they are not responsible for the decisions made as children, they cannot be charged for the pre-16 expenditure. However, post-16 expenditure is fair game.
Moving abroad does not exempt you from re-paying your student loans. It would however do so for a graduate tax.
Not necessarily: the US taxes its citizens who move abroad, there's no reason why we could not do the same.
The UK is permanently losing thousands of doctors overseas each year, analysis of official figures suggests.
More than half of doctors who have left the UK medical register told an official survey by the General Medical Council that they were both unlikely and unwilling to return.
Separate figures from the doctors’ regulator show that 4,843 individuals moved abroad to practise medicine last year.
Doctors have reported overseas recruiters from countries such as New Zealand, Canada and Australia capitalising on NHS industrial disputes to fill gaps in their own workforce.
While the UK medical workforce is growing, it is itself heavily reliant on overseas medical recruitment, with almost a third of UK doctors foreign-trained.
British taxpayers pay most of their university fees. They should stay here.
How would that work?
The reality is people go where they are paid the most.
And we aren't paying them enough so Australia are finding it incredibly easy to recruit UK trained staff because they pay more, offer better working conditions and more sun.
Well, if it keeps happening, they ought to pay more towards their degree. Why should British taxpayers fund a very expensive degree, only for the degree holders to go elsewhere?
A very good point, I think. We taxpayers should pay for the good-quality training of medics who are going to stay here and work for us.
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Should we require Oxbridge graduates to do the same, such as our PM? Or indeed all University graduates?
Yes.
Why limit this to graduates?
Anyone who has received free state education should be banned from working abroad.
I'm not talking about banning people going abroad. I am suggesting that they repay the state the money that it has spent on their education. As they are not responsible for the decisions made as children, they cannot be charged for the pre-16 expenditure. However, post-16 expenditure is fair game.
Moving abroad does not exempt you from re-paying your student loans. It would however do so for a graduate tax.
It does, in the real world, because the SLC don't usually bother to sue through foreign courts. Even if they know where you've gone, which unless you've notified them, they don't.
Comments
Although....anyone who asked to see those accounts could, but they would have to kill you afterwards.
Though I should point out that the anomalies in the link are compared to 1961-90. Present-day averages are at least 1C higher and something of a moving target. So, you can probably say that April has been a little bit colder than what passes for normal these days, but it's not a patch on the couple of cold springs we've had in the last decade (I think 2013 and 2017 were most notable from memory).
Quite a few were early at the start of the year (insanely early in a few cases). But then as March went into April, things have really quietened down. The number of species being registered is still there, but all the moth trappers are referencing the very low numbers of moths for those species that are about.
Now, this might be related to the weather this year. But it could also be down to a poor spring last year that impacted the food plants not being available. We also had ground like concrete late in the spring which made it damn near impossible for some moths to emerge.
Whichever, if we have another spring like this next year, time to get very worried.
heavenhell?In the previous year (2020) the SNP had no vehicles. In 2021 the balance sheet shows vehicles of £80,632. That might be the written down value of the motor home or it may be other things. I mentioned that a rather fancy minibus sat outside an SNP office in Dundee for a couple of years, apparently not moving.
Although it might also have been a cold-ish Spring. From memory of the local elections that year, it was unusually variable and I recall delivering leaflets in the snow and in very hot weather within a couple of weeks.
Except the MiL in due course, perhaps, if you believe in hell
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/22/alcohol-and-prostitutes-wagner-convicts-pardoned-by-putin-return-to-terrorise-home-towns?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
What I question is net impact at the presidential as opposed to congressional level.
I certainly see that it prevented the GOP from winning by high single figures or even more as is pretty common in a mid-term (particularly in the context of Afghanistan withdrawal and a poor economic/energy price backdrop). So instead of a healthy House and Senate majority they have a narrow House majority and the Democrats have the Senate. Dobbs played a big role in that.
But they simply don't need a blowout to win the Presidency. 51/49 is as good as 55/45 or even 60/40 - indeed, the GOP probably don't need a majority of votes. The vote shares in 2022 would have been enough.
The point is it's hard to get a blowout win based on wedge issues unless your opponent is very flawed. But you don't need that in a presidential system. You can afford, if you judge it right, to split the electorate down the middle and be highly divisive. 50%+1 is fine in that system, but isn't in a congressional election.
Anyone else, it’s more of a challenge.
I am comfortable with that assessment and it’ll take a lot to move me from it.
It lost between six and eleven engines, out of thirty-three. Certainly six. That's a massive amount.
IMV the Raptor engines are not ready for service; IIRC two engines didn't even start on the static fire.
https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2023/04/25/chris-mccorkindale-and-aileen-mcharg-rescuing-the-gender-recognition-reform-scotland-bill-the-scottish-governments-challenge-to-the-section-35-order/
The ones who are going to work abroad should pay for their own training in some other (cheaper) country and practise their skills there.
Looks like a perfect day for a cruise down the Sound of Mull, unless just heading for Craignure.
In reality I don't think it is as clear cut as that - any of those contests is close and decided on fine margins. But there is certainly an element of truth in it.
The engines themselves might be more reliable than that.
It's more likely his criminal trial entanglements that stop him.
The "good guys" are forcing women to the brink of death before they are allowed procedures which might save their life.
The balance of those strongly motivated by the issue has shifted.
@MattChorley
Jeremy Corbyn won the 2017 election.
My full mind-boggling interview with Noam Chomsky on your Times Radio at 11am"
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1650792807479615490
Advise changed for British nationals, they are now to make their way to the airport if possible.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/25/sudan-conflict-evacuation-news-live-fighting-ceasefire/
Main question now whether he keeps Harris as his VP nominee
Rough start for Trump, as jurors will absolutely hear from another journalist who says the real estate tycoon forced himself on her.
https://twitter.com/Jose_Pagliery/status/1650854736176791552
https://www.gov.uk/national-insurance/what-national-insurance-is-for
Breaking News: Harry Belafonte, the barrier-breaking singer, actor and activist who became a major force in the civil rights movement, has died at 96. nyti.ms/444e0xM
As I say, my recollection is there were some incredibly hot days in April that year over the local election campaign, and election day itself was baking.
In actuality he had little choice but to stick with her.
Justice Gorsuch was trying to sell a 40-acre property for 2 years.
9 days after his confirmation, he sold it & didn't disclose the buyer –– the CEO of a law firm that's since had 22 cases with business before SCOTUS.
If Australia wants to pinch them then that’s fine but the transferring doctor is going to need to ask the Australian recruiters to pay their training costs off.
Not only does this open up medical schools to anyone who otherwise couldn’t afford or was too scared of the cost but also if we lose doctors overseas we get the money back to go back into the training pot.
Chomsky speaks with great certainty and authority, such that people tend to believe him. He does need a bit of "nope, that's just not true" to prick the bubble. That's also true of him as an academic, where he's certainly more knowledgeable than he is as a political pundit, but equally adamant where he has limited justification for being so.
Chomsky's a nasty piece of work in my view. He has a fan-base and is quite often right on academic matters - but he is so vile and belittling to people who disagree... his academic articles are uncomfortable reading at times as there is a hell of a lot of very hard punching down towards very much junior (but capable) academics.
Now he's just embarrassing - though you have to make some allowance for his being 95.
But soon I shall be free…..
Free
FREE I TELL YOU. FREEEEEEEEE
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/25/neil-gorsuch-colorado-property-sale-00093579
...Nine days after he was confirmed by the Senate for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, the then-circuit court judge got one: The chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one of the nation’s biggest law firms with a robust practice before the high court. Gorsuch owned the property with two other individuals...
...Gorsuch did not disclose the identity of the purchaser. That box was left blank.
Since then, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court, according to a POLITICO review of the court’s docket.
They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties.
That he didn't recuse himself on those cases is as obvious a breach of judicial ethics as you can imagine.
The Supreme Court justices are basically saying they don't hold themselves to a lower set of standards than is expected of every other judge.
I reckon Raptor 2's have got significant issues - were they even at full power during launch, given there was no payload?
Still, the big issue is the pad. I'm unsure how they'll fix that, but it's a heck of a lot of energy to dissipate.
Anyone who has received free state education should be banned from working abroad.
Just ease off on the SNPorn.
That sounds... icky.
But it was interesting that the failures were very far from randomly distributed among the engines. That might just be coincidence, but it possibly suggests something about how they are plumbed in (to put it very crudely).
“I think the press is underestimating the damage RFK Jr. could do to Biden. He’s polling at 14%. If he keeps this up, it’ll matter. No president in the past half-century has won reelection after surviving a primary challenger who got into the double digits.”
https://twitter.com/charlescwcooke/status/1650865908301135873?s=61&t=GGp3Vs1t1kTWDiyA-odnZg
But you're still going to have to pay a fairly decent rate in the early years, or you'll see your best students deciding to train overseas and stay there.
He is a writer of fictions.
With that said...
(a) how much were Gorsuch's proceeds from the sale?
(b) was the property sold at market rates?
This is also nowhere near as egregious as the Thomas case, as that was both well above market rates AND Thomas's mother continued to live in the house.
Sure, one can make observations about what people in their 80s are on average like. But like all average they can obscure rather than illuminate. He's a moderate chap who is a good operator. They could do much worse, and may yet do so.
Never had recourse to it myself.
But there's a maximum of 4 sitting presidents who didn't get re-elected in the past half-century so we're looking at a fairly small sample size being extrapolated from.
The amount of money (several hundred k) isn't the issue. It is the failure to recuse, which ought to be clear to a first year law student.
In both cases, it ought to be a pretty bright line between what is acceptable as a judge, and what isn't.
We're not talking about politicians, even if they behave as such.
Also, Gorsuch, while an extremist, isn't completely unmoored from judicial principle in the way Thomas quite obviously has been for many years.
Thankfully, the truly hideous heat has abated, somewhat, and it is all much more tolerable. The evenings are soft and sweet, again, rather than baking and humid. The pollution has cleared as well
And Bangkok has the amazing energy, still, if not even more than before. I was just in the Food Court at the basement of Siam Paragon - about 90 hectares of thousands of people eating every cuisine in the world, and doing it noisily, happily, enjoyably (because the food is GOOD). Across the city the bars are full, the whisky pop ups are back, the cocktail VW combis with dancing tattooed ladyboys are back, the squid sellers in their carts trundle the streets, behind the blind accordion players and the hi society Chinese women in their limos, it’s as sensational as city as it ever was, and yet more skyscrapers rise even as I speak
There is no sense the Great Asian Boom is over, quite the opposite. Asia is still overtaking the west. No western city, not NYC, London, Paris, Rome, Berlin, LA (lol), anywhere, has the sheer vivacity and exuberance of Bangkok
I just noticed that tidbit on Twitter and thought it might be of interest to the more committed PB bettors
Bangkok is the worst part of Thailand - best to head to the hills, beaches or islands asap.
He’s even more of a lay than Kari Lake.
https://www.waterstones.com/book/out/tim-shipman/9780008308940
https://www.waterstones.com/book/out/tim-shipman/9780008308988
In addition, property sales take time. It's entirely possible thar the sale was agreed even before Scalia died.
Last point: GT has no political axe to grind, they are guns for hire.
Yeah he’s quite out there
However i think the wider point is good. I reckon Biden is seriously vulnerably to a black horse Dem candidate, probably more than any sitting president in recent history, who is seeking a second term. He is just TOO old, and he ain’t that popular
RFK maybe not, But someone else?
I have not focused enough on US Democrat politics to have any idea if there are feasible names out there - perhaps as black horses that’s bound to be true
However last time an incumbent US President faced a significant primary challenge, Carter in 1980, it was also from a Kennedy, Senator Ted Kennedy. Kennedy ran Carter close and Carter went on to lose the general election to Reagan
But yes. I assume that's nearly all name recognition.
It would however do so for a graduate tax.
That is it is a tax just like Income tax, or Vat or IHT or CGT, etc, etc. The government doesn't even pretend it is ring fenced.
Absolute bollocks
If you love the hedonistic pleasures of great cities - food, wine, fun, sex, bars, weird people, orgies, meeting Nick Palmer in a sauna, spectacular strangeness - Bangkok is fabulous. Anyone who says otherwise is a twat, or just a slower lower-watt type who likes sitting on a mountain
Fair enough. Mountains can be fun. But so can cities. And Bangkok is brilliant for fun
Janan Ganesh captured it well in the FT last summer, and it has only got livelier since then
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpR1UUnix3g