@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
Those are big changes. What’s he done wrong? As far as I can see he’s done nothing at all but waffle a bit. Maybe that’s it. The more you see of him the less impressive he is, as I said a few days ago
Because he leads Jack Shit, carps from the sidelines, copies the 1990s NuLab playbook by the letter, and otherwise just follows the mood of the general public - and people think he's insincere and a bit of a voicebox affected twat.
That's why.
Of course, if Labour do still lose with them they'll have something close to a nervous breakdown and have a full fledged internal war again.
SKS is an arch-establishment figure, squatting atop a political party. Parties go for these types because they believe that someone like SKS is the price that they need to pay to get into power. Same with Sunak. In actuality, the Davos policies quietly promulgated by such leaders have virtually no electoral support base and if explained to most people, would horrify them. They should get their own party and see how many people vote for them. I hear the name 'Change UK' might be free.
If you told me that SKS was a Tory plant I wouldn't be entirely surprised. However that's just an indication that Labour have, in recent years, gone completely mad.
There's an odd space opening up on the left. A Corbyn gap.
And on the right - a return to real politics is overdue.
Not easy in reality, though of course rhetoric abounds.
The Overton window is narrow for ideas that are different from status quo, and are economically feasible. The overwhelming majority of public spending is on stuff that cannot electorally be changed downwards (NHS, welfare, UC, pensions, defence, education, interest payments) and there is no room for higher spending when already borrowing £135 bn a year, and debt at 100% of GDP, with interest rates rising.
So while a new left and a new right politics would be welcome, the subject is highly constrained. Suggestions on a postcard.
I remember the VONC on Boris Johnson was triggered the day after the jubilee celebrations.
How many people care about the election of local cllrs though?
About a third who vote, so roughly the same who care about the coronation.
Despite TSE's attempts at trolling though he generally falls short on this issue - I would answer that poll 'not very much' yet that doesn't indicate a mass attack of apathy leading to the inevitable downfall of monarchy.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
Future of the men's Hundred in jeopardy as ECB and counties consider sweeping changes
GEORGE DOBELL - EXCLUSIVE: Discussions about both the tournament's format and future are going to be encouraged while counties will be asked to consider altering the T20 Blast and the value of an FA Cup-style knockout involving the National Counties
The Hundred would be greatly improved by getting rid of the awful graphics they use
I do hate too bang on about those graphics and camera angles, but it's been that way from the start and so must be intentional as some kind of differential branding. The format tweaks might be dumb but it's still cricket, but the display of the images being poor seems an odd way to appeal to non traditionalists.
It has been deeply concerning for the EveryDoctor team to have been contacted by an MP’s office, who are unhappy with us including information about their receipt of a donation from a person with links to private healthcare. I am appalled to report that their office attempted to insinuate that the inclusion of this information on our map was somehow because of a personal dislike which our team has for this politician. They also insinuated that we should behave in a partisan manner, and show a preference to this politician and the party they represent by removing information about this donation.
EveryDoctor is a non-partisan organisation. We are solely interested in advocating for patients, NHS staff, and the future of the NHS.. I’m appalled to report that I’ve been warned that this MP may tweet their displeasure at their inclusion on our map
We have verified the facts pertaining to this MP’s donation, and it shall remain on the map.It is appalling to witness the aggressive behaviour of some politicians towards campaigners.We’re not been bullied into hiding
Wes Streeting ditto
EveryDoctor is the group that organised the slate last year that won the BMA internal elections, putting the current Junior doctors leaders in post. It is a faction with a lot of support, and not impressed by Streetings lack of support for NHS workers.
I remember the VONC on Boris Johnson was triggered the day after the jubilee celebrations.
How many people care about the election of local cllrs though?
About a third who vote, so roughly the same who care about the coronation.
Despite TSE's attempts at trolling though he generally falls short on this issue - I would answer that poll 'not very much' yet that doesn't indicate a mass attack of apathy leading to the inevitable downfall of monarchy.
Monarchy is nothing short of a personality cult, and is therefore highly socialist! Consider North Korea!
the counties will be invited to consider the value of altering the T20 Blast to a two-division tournament incorporating promotion and relegation and the value of an FA Cup-style knockout involving all 18-first-class counties and the National Counties.
This knockout is more likely to be played as a T20, though some prefer the idea of a 50-over competition. It is possible this knockout competition could replace the men's Hundred.
At the same time, if the Hundred survives, there will be discussion over changing the format to make it a 'conventional' T20 fixture featuring 120 deliveries per team. There is a resignation from the ECB that hopes that other nations would adopt the format are, at best, wishful thinking.
But it adds no changes are imminent, this is discussion only.
Equally, I don't think they would be 'discussing' it if they weren't very seriously considering changes.
Future of the men's Hundred in jeopardy as ECB and counties consider sweeping changes
GEORGE DOBELL - EXCLUSIVE: Discussions about both the tournament's format and future are going to be encouraged while counties will be asked to consider altering the T20 Blast and the value of an FA Cup-style knockout involving the National Counties
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Not strictly true, I couldn't watch it whether I wanted to or not as no tv
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Simples, though not especially informative. More people (say 30%) will be watching the coronation than any other identifiable activity:
gardening 15% auction/shopping channel 5% shopping 12% staring at wall 3% DIY/cleaning car 8% pub 10% following PB 0.0001% playing or watching sport 4% reading 5% etc. edit: I forgot walking the dog. Most of the remainder.
I will be walking the dogs to the pub and following PB when I’m there. That must be worth more than 30%, surely?
Future of the men's Hundred in jeopardy as ECB and counties consider sweeping changes
GEORGE DOBELL - EXCLUSIVE: Discussions about both the tournament's format and future are going to be encouraged while counties will be asked to consider altering the T20 Blast and the value of an FA Cup-style knockout involving the National Counties
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Simples, though not especially informative. More people (say 30%) will be watching the coronation than any other identifiable activity:
gardening 15% auction/shopping channel 5% shopping 12% staring at wall 3% DIY/cleaning car 8% pub 10% following PB 0.0001% playing or watching sport 4% reading 5% etc. edit: I forgot walking the dog. Most of the remainder.
I will be walking the dogs to the pub and following PB when I’m there. That must be worth more than 30%, surely?
You'll need to take a lot of dogs to a very busy pub on a frantic PB day to make up for the 20 million or so (and their dogs) who are watching the coronation.
Future of the men's Hundred in jeopardy as ECB and counties consider sweeping changes
GEORGE DOBELL - EXCLUSIVE: Discussions about both the tournament's format and future are going to be encouraged while counties will be asked to consider altering the T20 Blast and the value of an FA Cup-style knockout involving the National Counties
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Not strictly true, I couldn't watch it whether I wanted to or not as no tv
Errr
You could watch it if you wanted to: all you would have to do is to head somewhere where it was playing.
As is often the case, there are more questions than answers. Affordability checks are a huge problem - Arena Racing Company (ARC) claim £40 million has already been lost because of the threat with punters not wishing their financial details to be checked going off-shore or elsewhere.
The level at which background checks would begin is a big worry to the racing industry but it reflects, I think, a wider societal shift in attitudes toward gambling. The odd thing is it's never been easier to gamble whether off your phone or into a shop open from 8am to 10pm if not later.
There is clear evidence and a growing societal awareness of the damage a gambling addiction can cause not just to the individual concerned but to those around them and part of the Government response is, I think, a concern over young gamblers.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
Will be happy if Toon have their flip flops and beach towels out for our penultimate game.
Credit to Toon, I didn't think they would be able to keep it up all season without a wobble.
I can't be the only red who doesn't want Everton to go down. Since the Football League was formed in 1888 they've only been outside the top flight for 4 seasons.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Not strictly true, I couldn't watch it whether I wanted to or not as no tv
There's always radio. A coronation on the radio would be rather like snooker on the radio. I have no doubt the BBC will give it their best shot.
And for no TV people (a growing circle of people BTW) it may well be findable on the interweb thingy, perhaps with ribald commentary from Pyongyang to liven it up.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
I find it weird that people who would consider themselves to be on the left, would view pre-industrial societies as idyllic.
Will be happy if Toon have their flip flops and beach towels out for our penultimate game.
Credit to Toon, I didn't think they would be able to keep it up all season without a wobble.
I can't be the only red who doesn't want Everton to go down. Since the Football League was formed in 1888 they've only been outside the top flight for 4 seasons.
Yes.
Of course the longest continuous stay in the top division is Arsenal, who replaced Sunderland in this many years ago.
At the start of each season the single most important Arsenal thing is to not go down. This week they appear to have forgotten there might be other aims and objectives, but at least we are staying up.
Sunak only polls about badly as Brexit enthusiasm, because there's so little of it. And incidentally he polls slightly worse than Starmer.
Nevertheless I think it's in Starmer's tactical interest to attack the Conservatives on their Brexit record, not to relitigate the referendum, but to help build a narrative of economic incompetence and a party putting ideology ahead of people's living standards. Labour has little to lose as almost no-one currently considering voting for them still thinks Brexit was a good idea. And the Conservatives still outpoll the Conservatives on the economic question. Starmer needs to tackle that perception.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
You don't think that a belief that humans should not survive and thrive, amongst humans, is a disease? What do you think are the implications of that belief gaining widespread acceptance?
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
I find it weird that people who would consider themselves to be on the left, would view pre-industrial societies as idyllic.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Not strictly true, I couldn't watch it whether I wanted to or not as no tv
There's always radio. A coronation on the radio would be rather like snooker on the radio. I have no doubt the BBC will give it their best shot.
And for no TV people (a growing circle of people BTW) it may well be findable on the interweb thingy, perhaps with ribald commentary from Pyongyang to liven it up.
Don't have a radio either and not going to mingle with people to watch a coronation
As is often the case, there are more questions than answers. Affordability checks are a huge problem - Arena Racing Company (ARC) claim £40 million has already been lost because of the threat with punters not wishing their financial details to be checked going off-shore or elsewhere.
The level at which background checks would begin is a big worry to the racing industry but it reflects, I think, a wider societal shift in attitudes toward gambling. The odd thing is it's never been easier to gamble whether off your phone or into a shop open from 8am to 10pm if not later.
There is clear evidence and a growing societal awareness of the damage a gambling addiction can cause not just to the individual concerned but to those around them and part of the Government response is, I think, a concern over young gamblers.
There are other papers worth reading. The Economist; and happily the Pyongyang Times with its distinctive take on matters is available free online. Its racing tips are however unreliable.
Will be happy if Toon have their flip flops and beach towels out for our penultimate game.
Credit to Toon, I didn't think they would be able to keep it up all season without a wobble.
I can't be the only red who doesn't want Everton to go down. Since the Football League was formed in 1888 they've only been outside the top flight for 4 seasons.
Yes.
Of course the longest continuous stay in the top division is Arsenal, who replaced Sunderland in this many years ago.
At the start of each season the single most important Arsenal thing is to not go down. This week they appear to have forgotten there might be other aims and objectives, but at least we are staying up.
And Chelsea just need 1 point to get to the 40-point safety mark.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
You don't think that a belief that humans should not survive and thrive, amongst humans, is a disease? What do you think are the implications of that belief gaining widespread acceptance?
You missed out the nonsense bit "We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own." You must have noticed how plenty of people don't remotely even look after their own health...
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
I agree, it is entirely possible that this is the only Coronation that I will ever see. At most I am likely to see 1 more. I am a bit sad someone thought it a good idea to cut back on the absurd clothes and presence of the Dukes. I would like to have seen the full show, not some cut price version.
Well, quite. What's the point if we can't see Charles in tights and play spot the aristocrat?
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
I find it weird that people who would consider themselves to be on the left, would view pre-industrial societies as idyllic.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
You don't think that a belief that humans should not survive and thrive, amongst humans, is a disease? What do you think are the implications of that belief gaining widespread acceptance?
You missed out the nonsense bit "We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own." You must have noticed how plenty of people don't remotely even look after their own health...
That was a response to RCS's criticism of that sentence.
The 'nonsense bit' is that humans need clean water, nourished soils, healthy animals, healthy plants - we need all this to survive, so we must (and will) ensure the healthy survival of the planet for selfish reasons.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
Parhetic Pete just pathetic
I salute your new found self-awareness. Well done!
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
You don't think that a belief that humans should not survive and thrive, amongst humans, is a disease? What do you think are the implications of that belief gaining widespread acceptance?
You missed out the nonsense bit "We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own." You must have noticed how plenty of people don't remotely even look after their own health...
Besides, the even trickier bit is how much we are prepared to put ourselves out to ensure the thriving of future generations.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
I don't detest Starmer. Actually I don't much like most politicians, particularly the successful ones. Sunak is personable, but it's superficial, and his political beliefs are not ones most people would be comfortable with. But he hides them in plain sight.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
I find it weird that people who would consider themselves to be on the left, would view pre-industrial societies as idyllic.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
I find it weird that people who would consider themselves to be on the left, would view pre-industrial societies as idyllic.
As is often the case, there are more questions than answers. Affordability checks are a huge problem - Arena Racing Company (ARC) claim £40 million has already been lost because of the threat with punters not wishing their financial details to be checked going off-shore or elsewhere.
The level at which background checks would begin is a big worry to the racing industry but it reflects, I think, a wider societal shift in attitudes toward gambling. The odd thing is it's never been easier to gamble whether off your phone or into a shop open from 8am to 10pm if not later.
There is clear evidence and a growing societal awareness of the damage a gambling addiction can cause not just to the individual concerned but to those around them and part of the Government response is, I think, a concern over young gamblers.
There are other papers worth reading. The Economist; and happily the Pyongyang Times with its distinctive take on matters is available free online. Its racing tips are however unreliable.
I'm not sure those of the Racing Post are that good.
Anecdotally, they used to run a competition between the racing tipsters of various newspapers back in the days of the Sporting Life and I'm sure the tipster from the Morning Star won on more than one occasion. The regional newspaper tipsters were also very good.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
"When it comes to which party leader Britons think would make the best prime minister, Keir Starmer is favoured by 29% (+1 from 12-13 April) compared to Rishi Sunak's 26% (no change). Four in ten (41%) are unsure."
If the best SKS fans can do when their boy is Polling 29/51 is to post Whataboutery figures from 2019 then they still dont see what is ahead of them
Well you are the one who keeps banging on about Corbyn's 2017 "victory". Perhaps we need Sunil to post his bar chart to prove your point.
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
Parhetic Pete just pathetic
I salute your new found self-awareness. Well done!
Do you feel better for that?
Its not my fault SKS is useless and will fail to win a GE
United screw it up again. Miss too many chances, not ruthless enough when on top and prone to switching off. A very very long way from having a run at the title.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
You don't think that a belief that humans should not survive and thrive, amongst humans, is a disease? What do you think are the implications of that belief gaining widespread acceptance?
You missed out the nonsense bit "We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own." You must have noticed how plenty of people don't remotely even look after their own health...
That was a response to RCS's criticism of that sentence.
The 'nonsense bit' is that humans need clean water, nourished soils, healthy animals, healthy plants - we need all this to survive, so we must (and will) ensure the healthy survival of the planet for selfish reasons.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of examples of human societies that have dirtied the water, depleted the soils and cared not a jot for the health of plants and animals in a rush for benefits now.
And yes, smart technologies will help solve some of the problems, including technologies that haven't been invented yet. But it's not smart to rely on a "someone clever will work something out in the future", because not every problem will turn out to have a solution.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
You don't think that a belief that humans should not survive and thrive, amongst humans, is a disease? What do you think are the implications of that belief gaining widespread acceptance?
It's an alternative view.
People are allowed to have alternative views, even deeply foolish ones.
Having different views is not a sign of mental illness.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
There are a few insoluble problems with degrowth, which nobody has worked out how to solve. Zero or negative growth means:
- increasing inequality as wealth accumulates more rapidly than incomes grow: just a mathematical fact, unless accompanied by massive redistribution - unemployment or underemployment, assuming technology continues to advance, or… - flat or declining productivity if technology stands still, in other words people taking longer and using more resources to do productive tasks - in an ageing population, ever less money available to governments to spend as the old age dependency ratio rises
In other words the dystopia of the late Soviet era.
Degrowth just doesn’t work on a societal level unless we are able happily to return to feudalism. So the only solution is technological clean growth.
Humans were meant to survive and thrive. We will do so whilst looking after our planet, because its health ensures our own. To believe otherwise is a disease.
Er…what does this collection of words actually mean?
It's the phrase "To believe otherwise is a disease" that I find the most disturbing and Orwellian.
Perfect night for the Toon. If we win on Sunday (I am going to the game, so we probably wont), as Liverpool play Spurs and Man U play Villa, Top 4 could be well within our sights.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
@acgrayling Starmer is working hard to shed support - large majorities of Labour Party members & voters are proEU and proPR. But Starmer? Why isn't he in the Tory Party? We have to get a hung Parliament next year to get out of the relentless retrograde grip of the dinosaur parties.
Those are big changes. What’s he done wrong? As far as I can see he’s done nothing at all but waffle a bit. Maybe that’s it. The more you see of him the less impressive he is, as I said a few days ago
That's not it. He's still polling better on the Yougov well/badly series than for most of last year and 2021. Low point seems to have been May 2021 - Badly 65%, Well 17%.
Maybe more people say he's doing badly now because Labour polling leads are under 20%. Either that or they are displeased with the rubbish about Sunak being in favour of paedos.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Not strictly true, I couldn't watch it whether I wanted to or not as no tv
There's always radio. A coronation on the radio would be rather like snooker on the radio. I have no doubt the BBC will give it their best shot.
And for no TV people (a growing circle of people BTW) it may well be findable on the interweb thingy, perhaps with ribald commentary from Pyongyang to liven it up.
If I follow it at all (I probably will not, as I’ll be spending much if it doing various birthday party things for my daughter), it’ll be via Radio 4. Long wave ideally. Anything else is essentially treasonous.
Beginning to look like the season Everton finally go down.
They’ve flirted with it on and off for decades. Nothing lasts forever. I do hope we get an interesting team coming up with boring Burnley and nasty Sheffield United though. Luton would be a hell of story, from non league to premier league in a pretty short span.
Beginning to look like the season Everton finally go down.
They’ve flirted with it on and off for decades. Nothing lasts forever. I do hope we get an interesting team coming up with boring Burnley and nasty Sheffield United though. Luton would be a hell of story, from non league to premier league in a pretty short span.
I don't think Burnley are so boring since they dumped Dyche.
Perfect night for the Toon. If we win on Sunday (I am going to the game, so we probably wont), as Liverpool play Spurs and Man U play Villa, Top 4 could be well within our sights.
I think the top four is pretty much set now, can't see it changing.
BS For Lefties - some made up fantasy they want to hear, like a bedtime story for kiddies to help them sleep at night. Bless.
Most of the BJOs will in their own time realise Corbyn has been marginalised not because he is left wing, but because he is now proven to be an antisemitic, incompetent egotist, and utterly off putting.
Most likely Stats for Lefties is set up and run by ultra’s who have never even voted Labour in their life. I’ll go an investigate what sort of alt policy suggestions they have and report back. 🫡
United screw it up again. Miss too many chances, not ruthless enough when on top and prone to switching off. A very very long way from having a run at the title.
That's encouraged me - now you've said that, it could well be our season next year.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Not strictly true, I couldn't watch it whether I wanted to or not as no tv
There's always radio. A coronation on the radio would be rather like snooker on the radio. I have no doubt the BBC will give it their best shot.
And for no TV people (a growing circle of people BTW) it may well be findable on the interweb thingy, perhaps with ribald commentary from Pyongyang to liven it up.
Don't have a radio either and not going to mingle with people to watch a coronation
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
Magical in what sense? Watching extreme dressage on the telly when you could be partying with your mates? Get a life.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
It would be a good idea for people to go back to living in caves and eating bilberries?
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
Magical in what sense? Watching extreme dressage on the telly when you could be partying with your mates? Get a life.
It's not magical and of course people could do something cooler or more fulfulling with their time. But millions will watch it, why judge them for that choice to not party with their mates instead?
There are going to be so many takes on this, and so many are going to be overegging it. It was the most special occasion I've ever seen. Only 25% watched it, what a failure. Etc etc.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
It would be a good idea for people to go back to living in caves and eating bilberries?
A few thoughts on that:
Zero growth is not the same as massive regression.
At some point, maybe it's eons away, we will have to stop growing; we cannot grow forever.
Maybe the Tories have already adopted zero growth as a policy, if the past 13 years is anything to go by?
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
It would be a good idea for people to go back to living in caves and eating bilberries?
A few thoughts on that:
Zero growth is not the same as massive regression.
At some point, maybe it's eons away, we will have to stop growing; we cannot grow forever.
Maybe the Tories have already adopted zero growth as a policy, if the past 13 years is anything to go by?
Growth doesn't have to be environmentally destructive. There is potential for green growth.
Will be happy if Toon have their flip flops and beach towels out for our penultimate game.
Credit to Toon, I didn't think they would be able to keep it up all season without a wobble.
I can't be the only red who doesn't want Everton to go down. Since the Football League was formed in 1888 they've only been outside the top flight for 4 seasons.
Are you actually from Merseyside? Most of the ‘Liverpool’ fans on here have no discernible connection to the city.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
The forecast is still uncertain, but it's unfortunately not on the get pissed in the sunshine with your mates side of neutral.
Think a good plan might be to lay in stocks of ice cream, fruit and bubbly, and just spend the day in bed.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
The demographic that "will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park" is a pretty small minority, I would guess.
Perfect night for the Toon. If we win on Sunday (I am going to the game, so we probably wont), as Liverpool play Spurs and Man U play Villa, Top 4 could be well within our sights.
Newcastle certain for CL now. As are Utd. The only question really is whether Tottenham can get the Europa place. It’s much more exciting at the bottom…
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
Cringe! Talk about embarrassing. Reminds me of the Russian joke about two fleas up an a*sehole. They poke their heads out. "Why do we live up this a*sehole, Dad?" "Because this is our rodina, son."
"A very strong plurality will watch it"? So most people won't watch it then? If this sh*t goes ahead, who will the third group be after those who watched it and those who didn't watch it?
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
It would be a good idea for people to go back to living in caves and eating bilberries?
Just perhaps we should stop building stuff, airports, shopping centres etc.
These ideas aren't without merit... It has taken 20 years for embodied carbon to become mainstream in architecture, IE reusing buildings rather than tearing them down and rebuilding new things
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
The demographic that "will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park" is a pretty small minority, I would guess.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some will drink in pubs, and some in working men's clubs in towns with a P in their name, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
The forecast is still uncertain, but it's unfortunately not on the get pissed in the sunshine with your mates side of neutral.
Think a good plan might be to lay in stocks of ice cream, fruit and bubbly, and just spend the day in bed.
Forecasts at that range are guesswork. I’m still hoping for a sunny weekend.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
The demographic that "will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park" is a pretty small minority, I would guess.
Why? Do you expect most people to sit in front of the telly watching extreme royal dressage for hours if the sun is shining? Would be odd behaviour.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
I think even misty eyed Royalists are a a bit ambivalent about KC3, even CR in his Union Jack underpants.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
The forecast is still uncertain, but it's unfortunately not on the get pissed in the sunshine with your mates side of neutral.
Think a good plan might be to lay in stocks of ice cream, fruit and bubbly, and just spend the day in bed.
Forecasts at that range are guesswork. I’m still hoping for a sunny weekend.
There's a good range of County Championship matches scheduled.
I wonder if Republicans can be convinced that watching the youtube feed of the match between Nottinghamshire and Lancashire on Saturday would be a rebellious act?
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
I think even misty eyed Royalists are a a bit ambivalent about KC3, even CR in his Union Jack underpants.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
There’s a full football programme on that Saturday at an absolutely critical stage of the season— so general interest in the coronation from the man on the Clapham omnibus is likely to be… minimal?
BS For Lefties - some made up fantasy they want to hear, like a bedtime story for kiddies to help them sleep at night. Bless.
Most of the BJOs will in their own time realise Corbyn has been marginalised not because he is left wing, but because he is now proven to be an antisemitic, incompetent egotist, and utterly off putting.
Most likely Stats for Lefties is set up and run by ultra’s who have never even voted Labour in their life. I’ll go an investigate what sort of alt policy suggestions they have and report back. 🫡
Reporting back.
Sussed it. Stats For Lefties is an anti-Labour party site designed to suck Labour support to the Greens. Remember that every time BJO posts from SFL, it is a front for a very pro-trans anti-capitalist faction (1 person?) in the Greens.
Obvious problem for Ell Folan who runs it, and is that 1 person, the vast majority of Green voters are not lefties 😄 I would be surprised if even a majority of Green Party members share Folan’s love for Corbyn and and ‘Teen Transitioning is Good’ agenda - Snookie certainly doesn’t. She doesn’t want any more hedgerows ripped out and concrete put in.
As you know, koz you read all my posts, I took a keen interest, and real hatred, in the Energy Price Cap guarantee, so I was genuinely interested to read what Folan said about it. But the article is pure gibberish. They don’t understand it at all. The take on how the EPCG happened is riddled with errors.
“When running for the Tory leadership, Truss insisted that her plan for soaring bills was only to cut taxes and halt green levies. Yet almost as soon as she assumed office, she intervened directly to cap bills via an energy price guarantee” Nope. She announced the EPCG plan long before winning her election.
“After Truss’s departure, chancellor Jeremy Hunt announced that the policy would soon be scrapped entirely for the vast majority of Brits. Yet he too quickly u-turned, first announcing that the cap wouldn’t be scrapped, but would instead increase to £3,000 from April.” Nope. Fact is Chancellor Hunt never announced it would be scrapped, what he announced, with Liz still PM, it would be scaled back to just a six month promise.
Having proved absolutely no grip on current affairs or political history of the last 6 months, Folan tries to convince us the governments need to intervene in cost of living crisis is nothing to do with covid reboot of world economy, or war in Europe, but simply because the capitalist system is broken and doesn’t work.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
I think even misty eyed Royalists are a a bit ambivalent about KC3, even CR in his Union Jack underpants.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
There’s a full football programme on that Saturday at an absolutely critical stage of the season— so general interest in the coronation from the man on the Clapham omnibus is likely to be… minimal?
Leicesters game (away at Fulham) is now Monday.
There are 5 PL games going ahead on Saturday though. All outside London, presumably due to policing issues.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
I think even misty eyed Royalists are a a bit ambivalent about KC3, even CR in his Union Jack underpants.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
Charles is an adulterer with little respect for the role of being a constitutional monarch.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
I think even misty eyed Royalists are a a bit ambivalent about KC3, even CR in his Union Jack underpants.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
Charles is an adulterer with little respect for the role of being a constitutional monarch.
I was asking myself the same questions at university nearly two decades ago. It struck me as an obvious conclusion of environmentalism - you start to question the need for growth. In some ways it is a bit like the campaign for nuclear disarmanent though, it is a noble idea but can't actually ever happen due to flaws in the human situation.
It would be a good idea for people to go back to living in caves and eating bilberries?
A few thoughts on that:
Zero growth is not the same as massive regression.
At some point, maybe it's eons away, we will have to stop growing; we cannot grow forever.
Maybe the Tories have already adopted zero growth as a policy, if the past 13 years is anything to go by?
What nonsense. Growth can keep on going on for ever because people innovate and find new ways of doing things.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
I think even misty eyed Royalists are a a bit ambivalent about KC3, even CR in his Union Jack underpants.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
There’s a full football programme on that Saturday at an absolutely critical stage of the season— so general interest in the coronation from the man on the Clapham omnibus is likely to be… minimal?
Leicesters game (away at Fulham) is now Monday.
There are 5 PL games going ahead on Saturday though. All outside London, presumably due to policing issues.
Forest play Monday night but assume that’s because of Monday Night Football on Sky. Lots of matches on the Saturday though, not just in the Premier League.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
What are you - a communist non-believer or something? Shiteaters will be a plurality because some non-shiteaters will do their gardening in small gardens, others in big gardens, others still in medium-sized gardens, others in allotments, etc., and it may or may not rain, and some will drink beer, and some in pubs, and so on. You either get the royalist "magic" or you're stupid and a bedwetter and leftwing. This is all as obvious as the existence of the British constitution.
Well, I hope you will enjoy your Saturday next weekend as much as the misty-eyed Royalists will.
I think even misty eyed Royalists are a a bit ambivalent about KC3, even CR in his Union Jack underpants.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
Charles is an adulterer with little respect for the role of being a constitutional monarch.
Why should he have or indeed need any respect for it? It’s a genetic lottery - and he won it, or lost it, depending on one’s point of view.
People don't know just how magical and special a Coronation is.
A very strong plurality will watch it, and polling numbers will go up significantly once it's happened, because it's very British and we're simply the best in the world at this sort of stuff.
How can a plurality watch it? It is an either or. Watch it or not watch it. Majority watch or majority not watch. Plurality does not come into it.
Very true. My guess is that a majority won’t watch - unless it’s pissing it down. People with any sense will use the long weekend to get blasted with their pals in the garden/park.
The forecast is still uncertain, but it's unfortunately not on the get pissed in the sunshine with your mates side of neutral.
Think a good plan might be to lay in stocks of ice cream, fruit and bubbly, and just spend the day in bed.
Forecasts at that range are guesswork. I’m still hoping for a sunny weekend.
There's a good range of County Championship matches scheduled.
I wonder if Republicans can be convinced that watching the youtube feed of the match between Nottinghamshire and Lancashire on Saturday would be a rebellious act?
Or just go to Trent Bridge and enjoy the day? What proportion of the population are actually going to sit inside and watch this thing on the telly? 20% 30% ?
Comments
The Overton window is narrow for ideas that are different from status quo, and are economically feasible. The overwhelming majority of public spending is on stuff that cannot electorally be changed downwards (NHS, welfare, UC, pensions, defence, education, interest payments) and there is no room for higher spending when already borrowing £135 bn a year, and debt at 100% of GDP, with interest rates rising.
So while a new left and a new right politics would be welcome, the subject is highly constrained. Suggestions on a postcard.
Despite TSE's attempts at trolling though he generally falls short on this issue - I would answer that poll 'not very much' yet that doesn't indicate a mass attack of apathy leading to the inevitable downfall of monarchy.
Monarchy = Socialism!
Let's make the 50 over competition a knockout event with the 18 championship counties and 14 other teams from the minor counties - with an open draw
Let's get rid of The Hundred!
So you detest Starmer. I think every last man jack of us on PB does too. He is utterly dreadful, however he is still head and shoulders better than Corbyn, and if one doesn't want a Conservative Government he is the only game in town. But as you want another Conservative Government keep banging on with your nonsense- Tory!
Will be happy if Toon have their flip flops and beach towels out for our penultimate game.
Credit to Toon, I didn't think they would be able to keep it up all season without a wobble.
You could watch it if you wanted to: all you would have to do is to head somewhere where it was playing.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/gambling-review/government-announces-frictionless-financial-risk-checks-in-long-awaited-white-paper-atlTq9I4o0FE/
As is often the case, there are more questions than answers. Affordability checks are a huge problem - Arena Racing Company (ARC) claim £40 million has already been lost because of the threat with punters not wishing their financial details to be checked going off-shore or elsewhere.
The level at which background checks would begin is a big worry to the racing industry but it reflects, I think, a wider societal shift in attitudes toward gambling. The odd thing is it's never been easier to gamble whether off your phone or into a shop open from 8am to 10pm if not later.
There is clear evidence and a growing societal awareness of the damage a gambling addiction can cause not just to the individual concerned but to those around them and part of the Government response is, I think, a concern over young gamblers.
And for no TV people (a growing circle of people BTW) it may well be findable on the interweb thingy, perhaps with ribald commentary from Pyongyang to liven it up.
Of course the longest continuous stay in the top division is Arsenal, who replaced Sunderland in this many years ago.
At the start of each season the single most important Arsenal thing is to not go down. This week they appear to have forgotten there might be other aims and objectives, but at least we are staying up.
Nevertheless I think it's in Starmer's tactical interest to attack the Conservatives on their Brexit record, not to relitigate the referendum, but to help build a narrative of economic incompetence and a party putting ideology ahead of people's living standards. Labour has little to lose as almost no-one currently considering voting for them still thinks Brexit was a good idea. And the Conservatives still outpoll the Conservatives on the economic question. Starmer needs to tackle that perception.
Jonathan Haidt covers this nicely.
Keep it #strong 💪
You would not wish to be poor, in medieval England, the Roman Empire, or classical Greece.
The 'nonsense bit' is that humans need clean water, nourished soils, healthy animals, healthy plants - we need all this to survive, so we must (and will) ensure the healthy survival of the planet for selfish reasons.
Anecdotally, they used to run a competition between the racing tipsters of various newspapers back in the days of the Sporting Life and I'm sure the tipster from the Morning Star won on more than one occasion. The regional newspaper tipsters were also very good.
Its not my fault SKS is useless and will fail to win a GE
Have a good evening
And yes, smart technologies will help solve some of the problems, including technologies that haven't been invented yet. But it's not smart to rely on a "someone clever will work something out in the future", because not every problem will turn out to have a solution.
People are allowed to have alternative views, even deeply foolish ones.
Having different views is not a sign of mental illness.
Low point seems to have been May 2021 - Badly 65%, Well 17%.
Maybe more people say he's doing badly now because Labour polling leads are under 20%. Either that or they are displeased with the rubbish about Sunak being in favour of paedos.
Most of the BJOs will in their own time realise Corbyn has been marginalised not because he is left wing, but because he is now proven to be an antisemitic, incompetent egotist, and utterly off putting.
Most likely Stats for Lefties is set up and run by ultra’s who have never even voted Labour in their life. I’ll go an investigate what sort of alt policy suggestions they have and report back. 🫡
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65403381
"Spain breaks record temperature for April"
There are going to be so many takes on this, and so many are going to be overegging it. It was the most special occasion I've ever seen. Only 25% watched it, what a failure. Etc etc.
Zero growth is not the same as massive regression.
At some point, maybe it's eons away, we will have to stop growing; we cannot grow forever.
Maybe the Tories have already adopted zero growth as a policy, if the past 13 years is anything to go by?
Think a good plan might be to lay in stocks of ice cream, fruit and bubbly, and just spend the day in bed.
"A very strong plurality will watch it"? So most people won't watch it then? If this sh*t goes ahead, who will the third group be after those who watched it and those who didn't watch it?
@BritainElects
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 43% (-)
CON: 30% (+1)
LDEM: 9% (-1)
via
@DeltapollUK
, 24 - 26 Apr"
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1651643505087750153
These ideas aren't without merit... It has taken 20 years for embodied carbon to become mainstream in architecture, IE reusing buildings rather than tearing them down and rebuilding new things
I'd ask someone to explain, but I doubt anyone is capable of explaining that mystery.
They may love the institution, pageantry and heritage, but often dislike the man at the centre of things.
Personally I shall watch some highlights and have a beer in our sports pavilion watching the fireworks.
I wonder if Republicans can be convinced that watching the youtube feed of the match between Nottinghamshire and Lancashire on Saturday would be a rebellious act?
Sussed it. Stats For Lefties is an anti-Labour party site designed to suck Labour support to the Greens. Remember that every time BJO posts from SFL, it is a front for a very pro-trans anti-capitalist faction (1 person?) in the Greens.
Obvious problem for Ell Folan who runs it, and is that 1 person, the vast majority of Green voters are not lefties 😄 I would be surprised if even a majority of Green Party members share Folan’s love for Corbyn and and ‘Teen Transitioning is Good’ agenda - Snookie certainly doesn’t. She doesn’t want any more hedgerows ripped out and concrete put in.
https://novaramedia.com/2023/02/03/transitioning-is-good-for-trans-teens/
As you know, koz you read all my posts, I took a keen interest, and real hatred, in the Energy Price Cap guarantee, so I was genuinely interested to read what Folan said about it. But the article is pure gibberish. They don’t understand it at all. The take on how the EPCG happened is riddled with errors.
“When running for the Tory leadership, Truss insisted that her plan for soaring bills was only to cut taxes and halt green levies. Yet almost as soon as she assumed office, she intervened directly to cap bills via an energy price guarantee”
Nope. She announced the EPCG plan long before winning her election.
“After Truss’s departure, chancellor Jeremy Hunt announced that the policy would soon be scrapped entirely for the vast majority of Brits. Yet he too quickly u-turned, first announcing that the cap wouldn’t be scrapped, but would instead increase to £3,000 from April.”
Nope. Fact is Chancellor Hunt never announced it would be scrapped, what he announced, with Liz still PM, it would be scaled back to just a six month promise.
Having proved absolutely no grip on current affairs or political history of the last 6 months, Folan tries to convince us the governments need to intervene in cost of living crisis is nothing to do with covid reboot of world economy, or war in Europe, but simply because the capitalist system is broken and doesn’t work.
https://novaramedia.com/2023/03/08/jeremy-hunt-is-desperate-to-ditch-the-energy-price-cap-too-bad-his-own-voters-need-it/
When will people like this ever grow up? Fairy tales for kiddies. 😆
They are irrelevant.
There are 5 PL games going ahead on Saturday though. All outside London, presumably due to policing issues.