Edit: I see the £510 was for legal costs, not a fine #crapreporting. Why'd he bother to contest it? (And I hope he's paying the legal bill.)
Always contest it. You'll get off about 50% of the time.
I got pulled last week by a bored cop who was trying to get me to admit to speeding (I had been but wouldn't admit it and he had no evidence). I had one of the Ukrainians in the passenger seat as I was taking her to one of her gigs. She works for a company that provides unlicensed Disney characters for kids' parties etc. The fat cop looked at me, looked at my lowered 997 turbo on HRE split rim blades, looked at the 18 year old 'Elsa' in the passenger sear and said, "I don't know where to start with this."
LOL, was that written by a twelve-year-old in the junior debate society, who just discovered the f-word?
There’s a fair point to be made about announcing policy first in the Commons, the abandonment of which appears to have been a feature of the last 25 years of British politics, but that wasn’t it, and neither to be fair was the Speaker’s over-reaction yesterday.
Hoyle showed he was all mouth and no trousers, if he wants to clamp down on outside announcements, for which he’d have my support, he needs to actually start sanctioning ministers for it.
Articles like this do suggest however, that Kemi Badenoch is who Labour really don’t want as LotO after the next election.
Nothing suggests Badenoch would be more effective opposition to Labour than Sunak. At best Badenoch might have more to her than first - dire - appearances indicate.
You mean she might surprise on the upside?
In that interview Badenoch's saying, you may know me as a batshit ideologue, but I can do the technocratic delivery thing too. That could count as an upside, while others might see her as disingenuous.
Well let's see her deliver something worthwhile on the Post Office instead of the feeble square root of f**k all she's done so far.
As for the EU Bill everyone said it was a hopelessly stupid piece of legislation, including me on here, ages ago. Finally recognising that hardly makes her a political Solomon.
Badenoch is implying the legislation has been cut in half to make it half as stupid.
Edit: I see the £510 was for legal costs, not a fine #crapreporting. Why'd he bother to contest it? (And I hope he's paying the legal bill.)
Standard report:
"A court official said the Archbishop pleaded guilty and was handed three penalty points and a £300 fine. He was ordered to pay £90 in costs and a £120 victim surcharge, bringing the final legal bill to £510."
The suggestion is that somehow he failed to cough up the standard penalty and it went to court by this oversight.
(BTW how many PBers have not driven at 25 in a 20?)
Yes, I'll hold my hand up there. But I'm not a sanctimonious twat lecturing others on how to live their lives on the basis of a supposed link to a supernatural identity. Not professionally, anyway.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
I think it'd be helpful if that figure was broken down by profession & country on an official gov't webpage or something.
E.g. 19,000 teachers from France; 20,000 doctors from the Philippines; 30,000 nurses from Thailand; 5,000 builders from Peru - obviously those won't be the figures but if the million people arriving are broken down it'd help the Gov't.
On topic, I guess Paul Bettison was so angry that the Brexit Party stood down so many candidates in 2019, no?
In the run-up to last week’s local elections Paul Bettison, the Conservative leader of Bracknell Forest council, was asked by Tory HQ to predict how the party would fare. Before polling day the party controlled 37 out of the 42 seats on the council and, despite the national political headwinds, Bettison was confident that their vote was largely holding up and would return at least 30 councillors.
On the night, the Tories were all but wiped out, holding on to ten seats and losing control of the council to Labour, who won 22 seats. The Lib Dems picked up seven.
As the dust settles Bettison’s disappointment has turned to anger. The Tory wipeout was not caused by a huge collapse in Conservative support — their vote share fell by only six points — but by an effective, unofficial electoral “pact” between Labour and the Liberal Democrats. Instead of fielding candidates across all council seats being contested, Labour stood aside for the Lib Dems where they were in third place and the Lib Dems returned the favour.
Mary Temperton, new Labour leader of Bracknell Forest council, insisted that the party was simply targeting candidates at wards it was likely to win. “Four years ago . . . we diluted our efforts. That did not happen this year,” she said.
But the Conservatives have no doubt about what went on. “This wasn’t even tactical voting — because voters had no choice in the matter,” said Bettison, who lost his seat. “It’s basically undemocratic. People were cheated out of their right to vote for the candidate of their choice.”
Perhaps most worrying for Rishi Sunak is that most of the upsets did not involve Bracknell-style informal deals. The Lib Dems fought 60 per cent of council seats last week, up 7 points on 2019, while the Greens fought 41 per cent, up 10 points, with Labour unchanged on 77 per cent.
Lord Hayward, a Conservative pollster, said such figures did not suggest widespread local pacts, arguing: “It was almost co-ordination by the voters, rather than by the parties.”
ENGLAND VOTERS for Labour Party at General Election:
2017: Corbyn 11.4 million 1997: Blair 11.3 million 1992: Kinnock 9.6 million 2019: Corbyn 9.2 million 2001: Blair 9.1 million 2015: Miliband 8.1 million 2005: Blair 8.0 million 1987: Kinnock 8.0 million 2010: Brown 7.0 million 1983: Foot 6.9 million
That does rather well demonstrate quite how unpopular Corbyn must have been at the same time
Labour lost that election by over 60 seats ROFL. If Corbyn was so popular why did he lose?
Brexit was playing with things back then. Labour got stop Brexit votes 2017 many of them probably from people who didn’t even vote in 2016.
And many of these voters didn’t know the true Jeremy in 2017 either. What BJO doesn’t mention is telling in itself, the direction in travel from 2017. Two years later Corbyn delivered the worse Labour result for 100 years in seats, and a stinking reputation not so easily fought back from. Boris wasn’t even all that popular in 2019, voters had to hold their noses voting Boris because Corbyn and his dangerous crew around him was the alternative.
You got wrong GE as BREXIT Election
2019 was oven ready deal Election SKS 2nd Referendum policy deserved a drubbing
You are being daft now. Labours 2017 vote numbers were DEFINITELY inflated by people, who’s main political issue was Brexit, thinking Corbyn was against Brexit and a Labour victory and government would stop Brexit happening.
That's right. 2 Brexit elections. In the 1st one it boosted Corbyn. In the 2nd one the opposite, it dragged him down. True 'par' Corbyn appeal was somewhere between the 2. But what happens is his fans make out the good election was him and not Brexit, and the bad one was Brexit not him, whereas his critics come out with the reverse bullshit that the good one was Brexit not him, and the bad one was him not Brexit.
Yours, Mr 'So Judicious It Hurts'.
I think that's slightly harsh but not wrong. In 2017 Corbyn managed to get away with seeming Brexity to Leave voters because of his clear Bennite anti-Common Market views from the 1980s and seeming to want to Remain to Remain voters because that was the policy of the Labour Party. By 2019 it was impossible to remain on the fence and his attempts to get back onto the 2017 position just made him look untrustworthy to both sides.
I don't quite get why the results of the local elections seemingly show that Labour will have problems winning a majority. They may not win a majority, but using the local elections as an argument for that doesn't make much sense to me.
They made big advances in the 'Red Wall' and in more traditional marginal areas. If all councils had been 'all-up' (rather than elected in thirds) then they would have won even more councils and seats and I doubt this argument would be being put forth as much.
I'd say that, if anything, the results suggest that Labour had a pretty good chance of a comfortable working majority even if no particular advances in Scotland are made.
My take too. The Lib Dems and Greens did extremely well at the expense of the Conservatives, while Labour only did somewhat well. The key question is how much Labour and LD/Green supporters are willing to lend their votes to the other parties. Depending on the answer, the locals could indicate no majority or a stonking majority for Labour (I think the possibility of a landslide is underestimated on here)
That's the key. I think the local elections should scare the Tories, because it looked like tactical voting was fully back, if not greater than ever before.
Before the elections, in discussion with HYUFD, I commented:
I believe the big drivers of LD gains/losses will be:
- What degree of tactical voting has come about or reduced since 2019? - How well/badly have incumbents done in either defending their record or boosting their personal vote? - How well/badly has targeting done? - How has local party strength (both for LDs and whoever they're fighting) increased/diminished in the areas being fought? - How accurate are/aren't the polls? - How will/badly Independents do in defending seats they won last time with widespread "sod the lot of you" mindsets? - How much will Voter ID affect the vote (either for or against)?
The actual opinion polls are within MoE (damn near identical) to how they were last time around, so these variables will, I believe be the key ones. My best guess right now is that anywhere between -50 and +250 is likely, depending on how those factors play out on the day.
The actual outcome was far off the top end of my range.
Looking through that list, incumbents records were mixed (some good, some not so good), targeting was definitely good, local party strength for LDs was up and Tories was down, the polls were pretty accurate, Independents did poorly, and Voter ID didn't seem to affect the vote significantly.
Those factors would have left the LDs at about +100 to, I'd have thought. The remaining +307 look to have been down to tactical voting (and of the other factors, local party strength also plays into the GE campaign to a degree as well). I'd therefore expect both Labour and LDs to significantly beat UNS, as it stands at the moment.
(Obviously there could be a falling out or other reasons why tactical voting would diminish between now and the GE but none appear on the cards at the moment)
What surprised me was how comfortable a lot of the LD wins were. I looked at about 50 that were LD gains from the Conservatives expecting them to be close, but they weren't. They looked like rock solid LD seats the margins were so great.
Also agree re Indies. In Guildford the Indies went for it, fighting every seat. I thought they might cause the LDs to lose seats. On the contrary the Indies lost seats instead to the Tories. The Tories actually did better in Guildford than the overall result suggests because they also lost 6 seats in one enclave that everyone was expecting (5 to LDs). If it wasn't for those the result would have looked good for the Tories and they still made net gains.
It looked similar in Torbay (would be interested in @MarqueeMark comments). Contrary to Tory spin the LDs made gains, it is just the Tories also did so to gain control at the expense of the Indies.
In these places it was the Indies performance that really made it possible for the LDs and Tories respectively to gain control of these councils
Perhaps most worrying for Rishi Sunak is that most of the upsets did not involve Bracknell-style informal deals. The Lib Dems fought 60 per cent of council seats last week, up 7 points on 2019, while the Greens fought 41 per cent, up 10 points, with Labour unchanged on 77 per cent.
Lord Hayward, a Conservative pollster, said such figures did not suggest widespread local pacts, arguing: “It was almost co-ordination by the voters, rather than by the parties.”
I don't know how you test this, but I'd love to investigate the theory that the main determinant of General Election results is the degree to which non-Conservative parties can bury their differences.
It would do a brilliant job of annoying everyone. Righties by saying that whatever they do is largely irrelevant and Lefties for saying that the long runs of Conservative government are basically their fault.
Edit: I see the £510 was for legal costs, not a fine #crapreporting. Why'd he bother to contest it? (And I hope he's paying the legal bill.)
Always contest it. You'll get off about 50% of the time.
I got pulled last week by a bored cop who was trying to get me to admit to speeding (I had been but wouldn't admit it and he had no evidence). I had one of the Ukrainians in the passenger seat as I was taking her to one of her gigs. She works for a company that provides unlicensed Disney characters for kids' parties etc. The fat cop looked at me, looked at my lowered 997 turbo on HRE split rim blades, looked at the 18 year old 'Elsa' in the passenger sear and said, "I don't know where to start with this."
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
Edit: I see the £510 was for legal costs, not a fine #crapreporting. Why'd he bother to contest it? (And I hope he's paying the legal bill.)
Standard report:
"A court official said the Archbishop pleaded guilty and was handed three penalty points and a £300 fine. He was ordered to pay £90 in costs and a £120 victim surcharge, bringing the final legal bill to £510."
The suggestion is that somehow he failed to cough up the standard penalty and it went to court by this oversight.
(BTW how many PBers have not driven at 25 in a 20?)
I've probably gone at 25 a few times through carelessness but generally speaking the lower the speed limit the more assiduous I am at respecting it. In a 20mph zone I generally trundle along at around 19-22. To this date the only speeding ticket I have was for doing 56 in a 50mph spot of the A1. On 70mph roads I generally do 75-80 but it doesn't seem to bother the authorities.
I tend to take the same approach, but I find 20s very difficult to stick to.
Living in London I am very used to them, to the extent that I now feel a bit alarmed driving at 30 in a built up area.
A new thing from the 20mph speed limits is quite a few people deciding they can only turn at 8-10mph for some reason. Very strange.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Based on the results in England, which was the only home nation with local elections last week, then the likely outcome of the next general election would be a hung parliament. Labour would be largest party but short of a majority and need LD support to govern. Effectively 2010 in reverse.
Starmer's majority hopes therefore likely rest on Wales and Scotland, if Labour increases its lead on seats in Wales and most importantly regains some seats in Scotland from the SNP then he could still get a narrow Labour majority UK wide as Wilson did in 1964 (also while failing to get a majority in England).
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Good luck, but I doubt you'll get away with it. I had to do a "Motorway awareness course" for a 46mph in a 40 in identical circumstances on a totally empty M5. Utterly ridiculous.
Edit: I see the £510 was for legal costs, not a fine #crapreporting. Why'd he bother to contest it? (And I hope he's paying the legal bill.)
Standard report:
"A court official said the Archbishop pleaded guilty and was handed three penalty points and a £300 fine. He was ordered to pay £90 in costs and a £120 victim surcharge, bringing the final legal bill to £510."
The suggestion is that somehow he failed to cough up the standard penalty and it went to court by this oversight.
(BTW how many PBers have not driven at 25 in a 20?)
Dura Ace? Hard to believe he ever drives as slow as 25mph anywhere
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Good luck, but I doubt you'll get away with it. I had to do a "Motorway awareness course" for a 46mph in a 40 in identical circumstances on a totally empty M5. Utterly ridiculous.
Ticket should come within two weeks, and most come within the first week, so likely to get away with it based on the information available.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
The UK regulations (which are set by the EU, LOL) state that the speedo can't understate the speed and must not overstate it by more than 10% + 10km/h. This is probably a relict from the days when the speedo was mechanically driven but in modern cars it's calculated in the ECU from engine speed and transmission data so it would be possible to make the speedo 100% accurate.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Hope you escape but I'd say wait a while longer before relaxing. I got one recently that came so late it was past the date for responding to it.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
No blowing my own trumpet (not least cos I work in advertising so am used to looking critically at imagery, plus the premise seem to me to be suspiciously provocative - and then considering the source... ) but the second image in particular looked pretty obviously AI - the arm thing, clearly, but also more general vague superimpositionary uncanniness. The first one looked more real, for sure.
Agree that it illustrates how easily people can be fooled on Socials - 'twas ever thus with words, but now images add a new dimension.
I don't quite get why the results of the local elections seemingly show that Labour will have problems winning a majority. They may not win a majority, but using the local elections as an argument for that doesn't make much sense to me.
They made big advances in the 'Red Wall' and in more traditional marginal areas. If all councils had been 'all-up' (rather than elected in thirds) then they would have won even more councils and seats and I doubt this argument would be being put forth as much.
I'd say that, if anything, the results suggest that Labour had a pretty good chance of a comfortable working majority even if no particular advances in Scotland are made.
The nub of the matter is that the Conservative vote went down but the Labour vote didn't go up.
Suggesting that Tory absententions may have been more significant than vote-switching, and that people wanted to vote against the Tories but aren't particularly rushing to vote for Labour.
Of course, if the same happens at a GE, Labour still wins. But they would be better off with a few positives and not merely being not as desperately bad as the the current lot. Because when a GE campaign approaches there is usually a swingback to the government from the election results and polls prior (noting Mrs May's big achievement in proving that this isn't always so).
In my view. swing back is tempered by the idea that This is Sunak's honeymoon. As an example, one can take a slice of 16 polls between Jan-Mar 91 which already showed Major over 5% ahead. He only eventually exceeded that level, with swing back, by 2.5%.
If Sunak's personal popularity drops, swing back doesn't necessarily yet start from here.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Google maps tends to report my speed at about 5% over what my speedo says. I tend to trust the app, but I'm not clear in my head why I do.
The speedo is designed to overreport your speed. Do you mean 5% under?
"The regulation states that speedometers must never underreport a vehicle's speed, while it must never overreport by more than 110% of the actual speed + 6.25mph.
So if you’re going 40mph, your speedometer may read up to 50.25mph - but it can never read less than 40mph."
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Google maps tends to report my speed at about 5% over what my speedo says. I tend to trust the app, but I'm not clear in my head why I do.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Google maps tends to report my speed at about 5% over what my speedo says. I tend to trust the app, but I'm not clear in my head why I do.
Google maps also tends to understate how long it will take to drive anywhere - though maybe that's just me!
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Good luck, but I doubt you'll get away with it. I had to do a "Motorway awareness course" for a 46mph in a 40 in identical circumstances on a totally empty M5. Utterly ridiculous.
It's worth keeping to the 20mph, particularly around schools. You're in deep trouble if you hit someone.
2.5% fatality rate at 20mph. 20% at 30mph.
At higher speeds, a big chunk of the stopping distance is your reaction, so unless you're a former fighter pilot (ahem), it would be difficult to justify boosting it to 80mph.
Students are always included (rightly) in the immigration figures, but once a student visa has expired (Their course is over) don't they tend to head back ? Or do most stay ?
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
No blowing my own trumpet (not least cos I work in advertising so am used to looking critically at imagery, plus the premise seem to me to be suspiciously provocative - and then considering the source... ) but the second image in particular looked pretty obviously AI - the arm thing, clearly, but also more general vague superimpositionary uncanniness. The first one looked more real, for sure.
Agree that it illustrates how easily people can be fooled on Socials - 'twas ever thus with words, but now images add a new dimension.
I have half a dozen images like the first. I just wanted to vary it
Fact is fake AI photos are now way beyond the uncanny valley and living amongst us
Advertising as we know it is finished, for a start
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
The UK regulations (which are set by the EU, LOL) state that the speedo can't understate the speed and must not overstate it by more than 10% + 10km/h. This is probably a relict from the days when the speedo was mechanically driven but in modern cars it's calculated in the ECU from engine speed and transmission data so it would be possible to make the speedo 100% accurate.
Is there not some potential for inaccuracy due to tyre pressure, such that you travel a different distance for each revolution of the axle?
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
No blowing my own trumpet (not least cos I work in advertising so am used to looking critically at imagery, plus the premise seem to me to be suspiciously provocative - and then considering the source... ) but the second image in particular looked pretty obviously AI - the arm thing, clearly, but also more general vague superimpositionary uncanniness. The first one looked more real, for sure.
Agree that it illustrates how easily people can be fooled on Socials - 'twas ever thus with words, but now images add a new dimension.
It is very generic photography. And a lot of fashion stuff has long been digitally manipulated to the point of being wholly manufactured. Remember the row about “fake sizing” of models to the point of physical impossibility?
Students are always included (rightly) in the immigration figures, but once a student visa has expired (Their course is over) don't they tend to head back ? Or do most stay ?
A percentage stay - depends on what they are studying IIRC.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Hope you escape but I'd say wait a while longer before relaxing. I got one recently that came so late it was past the date for responding to it.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Them digital signs are not calibrated, and somewhat inaccurate.
The easiest way to check your spedo, is to have a passenger with a GPS (almost all phones now have this), while you drive at a steady speed, preferably with cruise control.
It’s illegal for your spedo to read under, so manufacturers traditionally made them read 5-10% over to avoid trouble. That said, most modern cars with digital readouts are a lot more accurate.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
Migration or immigration? If 500,000 arrived and 500,000 left that’s surely OK?
No, NET migration - i.e. a million more people arrive than leave.
@OldKingCole - my apologies, I've just noticed what you said: indeed, it's lazy use of English by the journalist (and indeed me) who should have said net IMmigration. Pedantically (and who here doesn't applaud a pedant?) you are quite correct.
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
No blowing my own trumpet (not least cos I work in advertising so am used to looking critically at imagery, plus the premise seem to me to be suspiciously provocative - and then considering the source... ) but the second image in particular looked pretty obviously AI - the arm thing, clearly, but also more general vague superimpositionary uncanniness. The first one looked more real, for sure.
Agree that it illustrates how easily people can be fooled on Socials - 'twas ever thus with words, but now images add a new dimension.
I have half a dozen images like the first. I just wanted to vary it
Fact is fake AI photos are now way beyond the uncanny valley and living amongst us
Advertising as we know it is finished, for a start
'XXXX as we know it is finished' is the story of progress, no?
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
The UK regulations (which are set by the EU, LOL) state that the speedo can't understate the speed and must not overstate it by more than 10% + 10km/h. This is probably a relict from the days when the speedo was mechanically driven but in modern cars it's calculated in the ECU from engine speed and transmission data so it would be possible to make the speedo 100% accurate.
Is there not some potential for inaccuracy due to tyre pressure, such that you travel a different distance for each revolution of the axle?
A bit. You normally lose 1mm of circumference for every 2psi pressure drop so the tyres would have to be perilously underinflated to make a significant difference.
mph Edit: I see the £510 was for legal costs, not a fine #crapreporting. Why'd he bother to contest it? (And I hope he's paying the legal bill.)
Standard report:
"A court official said the Archbishop pleaded guilty and was handed three penalty points and a £300 fine. He was ordered to pay £90 in costs and a £120 victim surcharge, bringing the final legal bill to £510."
The suggestion is that somehow he failed to cough up the standard penalty and it went to court by this oversight.
(BTW how many PBers have not driven at 25 in a 20?)
I've probably gone at 25 a few times through carelessness but generally speaking the lower the speed limit the more assiduous I am at respecting it. In a 20mph zone I generally trundle along at around 19-22. To this date the only speeding ticket I have was for doing 56 in a 50mph spot of the A1. On 70mph roads I generally do 75-80 but it doesn't seem to bother the authorities.
I tend to take the same approach, but I find 20s very difficult to stick to.
Living in London I am very used to them, to the extent that I now feel a bit alarmed driving at 30 in a built up area.
20 mph are near universal in Scotland and I think they are effective in reducing average speeds. I feel people drive fast in urban areas when I go to England.
I think the expectation is that drivers moderate their speed in 20mph zones but not necessarily drive at less than 20mph. The archbishop was perhaps unlucky.
Speed limits logically should be an absolute maximum: as fast as is safe but no more than this. And set relatively high. Drivers however treat them as recommended speeds and they should be OK as long as they don't exceed the limits massively. So you have to set limits low to get average speeds down.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
Yes. SFAICS the BBC etc report all this as an increase in total GDP without reference to GDP per head.
We feel on this account to be in a completely crazy circular motion in which ever rising numbers of migrants are needed to keep the show on the road, which in turn leads to further need of further numbers to keep the show on the road. But there are still vast numbers of vacancies in essential services of all sorts, and 5 million people of working age not working.
I suspect a small Labour majority is more likely than no majority, but depends on the campaign. The Tories will do everything they can to sow doubt - that is what Labour under Brown did quite well in 2010 and was one factor that caused the Tories to come up short in that election.
In reality, the Mirror obtained the information after employing private investigators to pose as the prince’s accountant, phone the bank and illegally “blag” his account details, the court heard...
In the words of Kevin Keegan I'd love it, I'd just love it.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Hope you escape but I'd say wait a while longer before relaxing. I got one recently that came so late it was past the date for responding to it.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Hope you escape but I'd say wait a while longer before relaxing. I got one recently that came so late it was past the date for responding to it.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
Yes. SFAICS the BBC etc report all this as an increase in total GDP without reference to GDP per head.
We feel on this account to be in a completely crazy circular motion in which ever rising numbers of migrants are needed to keep the show on the road, which in turn leads to further need of further numbers to keep the show on the road. But there are still vast numbers of vacancies in essential services of all sorts, and 5 million people of working age not working.
And very many of them are in the "retired comfortably and very early" category who are not going to be enticed back- why should they be?
Hence even lowish paid immigrants working can improve the overall average. Making up numbers, adding four percent to the number of workers only adds three percent to the number of mouths to feed.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Google maps tends to report my speed at about 5% over what my speedo says. I tend to trust the app, but I'm not clear in my head why I do.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Google maps tends to report my speed at about 5% over what my speedo says. I tend to trust the app, but I'm not clear in my head why I do.
Google maps also tends to understate how long it will take to drive anywhere - though maybe that's just me!
That's funny. I find Google maps usually spot on in terms of time, but under-reads the speedo by 5% or more. I had assumed the GPS was more accurate than the speedo (since by law these can't under-read but can over-read), but I'm not convinced that the GPS recorded speed is completely accurate?
So net migration of 700,000. That’s three Milton Keyneses.
How many housing units were completed last year?
Totally unsustainable. This will lead to a populist backlash eventually.
Now, last year’s figures will be somewhat unusual, because of Ukraine and Hong Kong. The Ukranians are mostly women and children to intend to leave at the earliest opportunity once the war finishes, and the vast majority are not in their own housing but staying with families in the UK. The HK immigrants were a one-off as the country got taken over by China, but will likely be staying for the long term
Yes, at some point, there will need to be radical solutions.
My suggestion, would be a variation on how immigration works in where I live. If there’s a need for low-skilled immigrants, you offer a number of single people under 30 from most countries, a two-year non-renewable work permit. You’d need to limit the numbers, to protect British unskilled workers and stop a race back to minimum wage that we had under FoM, but the important thing is that these are temporary migrants expected to leave once their visa expires.
SNP implosion combines with tactical voting and a general mood for change. They may fall just short of an overall majority but I think Scotland will just get them over the line.
Interesting, thanks.
I do think Labour could win 20-30 seats in Scotland and being largest party there is also not out of the question.
Useless, when it comes to govewrning in England. That's the dilemma.
Labour have to get an absolute majority - or a LD coalition - on English seats alone, as well as in the UK as a whole.
The inverse West Lothian question, which everyone seems to be missing.
-The Tories scrapped EVEL -Labour are against EVEL, and had MPs like John Reid in cabinet positions which were devolved in Scotland. I don't think Starmer gives a shit about the Daily Mail going nuts if he instructs Pamela Nash and Douglas Alexander to go through the 'Aye lobby' to get his NHS reforms through. Nobody will care other than people who would never vote Labour in a million years.
The Tories never did implement or scrap EVEL properly. And they scrapped it precisely to create a bear trap for Labour.
It's all abour perception. Things have changed forever. The Tories have nothing to lose. Labour have everything to lose.
If you think Starmer would lose a close run vote in parliament to get a key piece of legislation because he instructed SLAB MPs to abstain I have a bridge to sell to you.
And if you think that the Tories would never let him forget it, on the grounds of the illegitimacy of the vote in their perception, you are far too naive to be allowed out on your own on a political betting website.
I suspect Starmer would try to use Barnett consequentials to justify it and people will move on. I can see the Tories trying it, but it will probably be about as successful as the various shit they try and pin on him. It will enrage GB news viewers and Daily Mail readers but nobody else.
There's more to voting than Barnett consequentials.
Moreover, yes, the students fees vote had Barnett consequentials, but there was a huge row about LDs for Scottish constituencies voting. Swap SNP for LD and it woiuld be much worse today now the issue has been sensitised by Mr Cameron. Not very logical, but there we are.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Google maps tends to report my speed at about 5% over what my speedo says. I tend to trust the app, but I'm not clear in my head why I do.
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
It was on the M25 in a variable speed limit. I must have missed the sign (fair enough) but so did everyone else.
Personally I think 75mph is perfectly safe on some sections of single carriageway but I accept there are plenty where it's dangerous... then again there are plenty of national speed limit roads where 60 is suicidal.
There are definitely sections where single carriageway speeding is relatively safe, but I'd still throw the book at anyone who does it. Those 60 roads have all sorts of things going on that motorways try to engineer out: blind summits, fallen branches, adverse cambers, no central reservation protection, cyclists, walkers, tractors, potholes, oncoming overtakers and much more. People get complacent on A-roads, especially ones they know, and suddenly one day conditions are different and wham you're in a pickle. I've got a lot more sympathy with people going too fast on a motorway: they are spaces designed for speed, and the risks are lower. 85 on a motorway is silly. 75 on a single carriageway is stupid.
The 70 mph speed limit was brought in when people were driving Ford Anglias and Cortinas. Modern cars stop in half the distance. 70mph is absurdly slow which is why virtually no-one adheres to it and why most other European countries have the equivalent of 80
Depends where in the country you are and I think many forget the typical speedometer showing 75mph is far far more likely to be doing 70mph or less than near 75mph. On the M25 in medium traffic, good conditions I'd guess the proportion of traffic actually speeding is less than 10% of vehicles, maybe 20-25% of cars. Very few doing actual 80mph+ rather than 80mph+ on speedo.
I hadn't really clocked till recently (probably cos I only drive shortish distances with a car full of kids or shopping) but the speedo on our mighty lemon yellow Kia defo understates vs them digital signs that tell you what your speed is.
Google maps tends to report my speed at about 5% over what my speedo says. I tend to trust the app, but I'm not clear in my head why I do.
Google maps also tends to understate how long it will take to drive anywhere - though maybe that's just me!
That's funny. I find Google maps usually spot on in terms of time, but under-reads the speedo by 5% or more. I had assumed the GPS was more accurate than the speedo (since by law these can't under-read but can over-read), but I'm not convinced that the GPS recorded speed is completely accurate?
Google Maps on your phone is going to be damn close, if you’re doing a steady speed on a straight road. Much more so than a mechanical spedo.
There are dedicated in-car race GPS boxes, from companies like Racelogic and Dragy, that have a high resolution and will be more accurate still.
If we've grown by 0.1% in a quarter, but added say 700k people (175k in a quarter) then that's a population increase of 0.25% - which means that gdp per cap has gone down ?
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
Immigration is a wash, I believe. Each immigrant will add as much to the economy as they increase the population. But overall GDP does matter for certain things including tax receipts and immigration can help productivity (another Brexit loss).
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Congratulations. You are the first PB-er to guess that these images are entirely fake. The women, the clothes, the locations, everything
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
No blowing my own trumpet (not least cos I work in advertising so am used to looking critically at imagery, plus the premise seem to me to be suspiciously provocative - and then considering the source... ) but the second image in particular looked pretty obviously AI - the arm thing, clearly, but also more general vague superimpositionary uncanniness. The first one looked more real, for sure.
Agree that it illustrates how easily people can be fooled on Socials - 'twas ever thus with words, but now images add a new dimension.
I have half a dozen images like the first. I just wanted to vary it
Fact is fake AI photos are now way beyond the uncanny valley and living amongst us
Advertising as we know it is finished, for a start
I doubt that but maybe editorial fashion photography will be which would be a shame. I spent my first 20 years working as a fashion photographer and without editorial fashion there are very few ways into it
Btw I concocted and procured those AI photos in about 5 minutes
I could have spent 30 minutes honing the prompt and getting even more believable images to the extent NO ONE could possibly know if they are real or not
Truth is dead, long live the pre generative post truth
So net migration of 700,000. That’s three Milton Keyneses.
How many housing units were completed last year?
Totally unsustainable. This will lead to a populist backlash eventually.
Now, last year’s figures will be somewhat unusual, because of Ukraine and Hong Kong. The Ukranians are mostly women and children to intend to leave at the earliest opportunity once the war finishes, and the vast majority are not in their own housing but staying with families in the UK. The HK immigrants were a one-off as the country got taken over by China, but will likely be staying for the long term
Yes, at some point, there will need to be radical solutions.
My suggestion, would be a variation on how immigration works in where I live. If there’s a need for low-skilled immigrants, you offer a number of single people under 30 from most countries, a two-year non-renewable work permit. You’d need to limit the numbers, to protect British unskilled workers and stop a race back to minimum wage that we had under FoM, but the important thing is that these are temporary migrants expected to leave once their visa expires.
Not sure inviting lots of people in but explicitly making sure they are not aligned with the long term of the UK but instead of working out how cash they can extract in 2 years is sensible.
How about we recognise the reality of our demographics means we will have immigration, whatever politicians promise, so we get on with builiding the necessary houses and infrastructure instead of pretending?
Yes, Kemi is finished (sorry Dan). Although it's weird: for a moment her star shone so powerfully amongst the Tory Right. But who's next? All the evidence suggests Penny, but the Tories, their admirers and the Daily Mail in particular must agree to a significant bout of collective amnesia over the Wokey Cokey stuff.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
How accurate are the Telegraph, though, when they speculate about things?
Oddly it's the Tele and their ilk who now seem keenest to rub the Right's nose in diversity. I wonder why?
They seem to like to foster fears of the country 'getting swamped'. It can't be good for the mindset of their loyal readers hearing this sort of thing day in day out.
Btw I concocted and procured those AI photos in about 5 minutes
I could have spent 30 minutes honing the prompt and getting even more believable images to the extent NO ONE could possibly know if they are real or not
You can reverse image search them on Yandex (way better than Google but Putin gets your NI number). If they don't show up on that they are probably AI crap.
So net migration of 700,000. That’s three Milton Keyneses.
How many housing units were completed last year?
Totally unsustainable. This will lead to a populist backlash eventually.
I assume the government chooses more immigration because it thinks it necessary. Noteworthy the big increase started after Brexit. Did Brexit make immigration more necessary?
Russia's failure in Ukraine would always eventually be followed by a fight between different Russian factions over who was to blame. I don't think we're at the stage yet where that fight is more important than the fight against Ukraine, but when we are, the war in Ukraine will be nearly over
"Sergey Radchenko @DrRadchenko Lol. Prigozhin trolls Shoigu, citing the Defense Minister’s “many years of experience conducting military operations” (Shoigu is widely known for lacking any such experience). The daggers are out. Shoigu’s probable plan is to let Wagner get annihilated."
For those who were following this story yesterday:
Commentator Tim Pool responds to The NY Times story, that described his podcast as ‘a far-right vector for conspiracy theories’. https://youtube.com/watch?v=3ZuH-61ufgk
So net migration of 700,000. That’s three Milton Keyneses.
How many housing units were completed last year?
Totally unsustainable. This will lead to a populist backlash eventually.
I assume the government chooses more immigration because it thinks it necessary. Noteworthy the big increase started after Brexit. Did Brexit make immigration more necessary?
I should be quite grateful for my £90 course offer for 75 in a 60 then, at the archbishop's rate it would have been over £1500.
If it were up to me, you'd be banned for 75 in a 60.
I bet it was a variable limit on a motorway.
Hmmm, I'll wind that back slightly if so. I was picturing a single carriageway A-road, but you're right to remind me that context matters.
I feel I'm tempting fate writing this, but I was flashed by a camera on the M25 two weeks ago. It was at 2am and it was the first gantry with limits with it set to 50mph. I refuse to brake unnecessarily on a motorway so just got of the gas. I reckon I was doing 65mph when I went through it, but my view is, they need to give you a chance to slow down. Going from 70 to 50 and doing so on a gantry with not much sighting (it was the one after you go over the M4) is a bit off in my opinion.
Anyway, not heard anything, so maybe they don't care or someone has shown some common sense.
Hope you escape but I'd say wait a while longer before relaxing. I got one recently that came so late it was past the date for responding to it.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
Immigration is a wash, I believe. Each immigrant will add as much to the economy as they increase the population. But overall GDP does matter for certain things including tax receipts and immigration can help productivity (another Brexit loss).
It's hardly a "Brexit loss" when immigration is actually increasing. It depends on who is coming over here, and how they compare to those who came before.
Btw I concocted and procured those AI photos in about 5 minutes
I could have spent 30 minutes honing the prompt and getting even more believable images to the extent NO ONE could possibly know if they are real or not
You can reverse image search them on Yandex (way better than Google but Putin gets your NI number). If they don't show up on that they are probably AI crap.
No. Any image searcher is about to be swamped by trillions - literally, trillions - of fake AI images. No machine will be able to keep up with the machines
"Royal fan detained for 13 hours after 'wrongful arrest' at King's coronation
Alice Chambers was an innocent bystander waiting to see the King drive past before being crowned at Westminster Abbey when she was arrested and locked up for the whole day."
I was assures yesterday this was a non-issue and the Met had behaved perfectly throughout.
Labour need to split up the Met.
Why are you blaming the police and not the protestors for things like this happening? The question to you is, if I placed you in overall charge for managing the security of the Coronation, what would have been different?
I was there, and I told the protestors there what they could and couldn’t do - no noises to alarm the horses, no going beyond the barricades, and if someone’s come all from Australia to enjoy the vibe and ultimate history making pageantry (that was indeed awesome) would it be fair to stick their placards up so they can’t see it and chant over the bands and bagpipes?
I told the protestors they shouldn’t be there. They were exorcising their rights to protest without any thought to the responsibilities which come with the right to protest, that is injury to others. You just can’t have any protest a protest group thinks up, protest just can’t be anything goes. The right to protest comes with responsibility on protestors too.
You really are a loon
My protest is to glue myself to Farooq, he won’t have have a problem with it, because he believes the right to protest is alright to do absolute anything you want, that’s the protesters right. Rights come without any duty to be responsible when using them.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
Immigration is a wash, I believe. Each immigrant will add as much to the economy as they increase the population. But overall GDP does matter for certain things including tax receipts and immigration can help productivity (another Brexit loss).
It's hardly a "Brexit loss" when immigration is actually increasing. It depends on who is coming over here, and how they compare to those who came before.
Productivity is a Brexit loss unless compensated by certain types of immigration. The productivity loss is inherent to Brexit, while immigration was a largely a national competence when in the EU. Previous UK governments could have chosen a similarly high immigration path before Brexit.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
Immigration is a wash, I believe. Each immigrant will add as much to the economy as they increase the population. But overall GDP does matter for certain things including tax receipts and immigration can help productivity (another Brexit loss).
In which case, immigration is going to be largely bad for us - the pressure it causes on housing alone does more damage than the benefits, and we should be targeting net zero migration.
My suggestion would be that we ditch almost all the currently permitted "skilled worker" immigration, requiring you to need a job offer at £75k to come.
I would also tighten up the family reunion rules, in particular blocking family reunion immigration unless one of the persons is a British Citizen (not merely someone with indefinite leave to remain).
The student numbers thing is complicated - in theory students shouldn't add to the net migration numbers (for each one who comes, another should go) - what we need to do is to stop the leakage where people come as students and then don't go - given this is currently something like 26% of those coming on student visas it needs fixing urgently.
The telegraph is speculating that net migration for the past year, to be announced in May 25, will be around ONE MILLION
Stupefyingly huge
It's OK because the government is controlling immigration now that we have taken back control.
Immigration is the one Brexit benefit according to the OBR analysis. Loss of investment and suppression of trade worse than it expected, but higher than expected immigration partly compensated, confirming their prediction of an overall 4% damage to the economy caused by Brexit.
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
I may be misunderstanding this, but surely there is no point to (picking numbers out of the air) a 1% increase in GNP if we also have a 1% increase in population? The country gets richer, but those riches have to be shared more widely - so individually, we don't get any richer.
Immigration is a wash, I believe. Each immigrant will add as much to the economy as they increase the population. But overall GDP does matter for certain things including tax receipts and immigration can help productivity (another Brexit loss).
Immigration will reduce the burden of the national debt per capita. Certainly the contrary situation, of net emigration and a shrinking population left behind to service the huge mountain of accumulated debt, would be pretty uncomfortable in its own way.
So net migration of 700,000. That’s three Milton Keyneses.
How many housing units were completed last year?
Totally unsustainable. This will lead to a populist backlash eventually.
Now, last year’s figures will be somewhat unusual, because of Ukraine and Hong Kong. The Ukranians are mostly women and children to intend to leave at the earliest opportunity once the war finishes, and the vast majority are not in their own housing but staying with families in the UK. The HK immigrants were a one-off as the country got taken over by China, but will likely be staying for the long term
Yes, at some point, there will need to be radical solutions.
My suggestion, would be a variation on how immigration works in where I live. If there’s a need for low-skilled immigrants, you offer a number of single people under 30 from most countries, a two-year non-renewable work permit. You’d need to limit the numbers, to protect British unskilled workers and stop a race back to minimum wage that we had under FoM, but the important thing is that these are temporary migrants expected to leave once their visa expires.
Not sure inviting lots of people in but explicitly making sure they are not aligned with the long term of the UK but instead of working out how cash they can extract in 2 years is sensible.
How about we recognise the reality of our demographics means we will have immigration, whatever politicians promise, so we get on with builiding the necessary houses and infrastructure instead of pretending?
My brother got a similar visa in Australia. He stayed there for just under a year, did a few different jobs. It was make very clear to him, that he had no recourse to public funds, had to leave when his visa expired, and that he’d be arrested if he overstayed.
I say we look at what works elsewhere in the world, rather than trying to re-invent the wheel.
Comments
Stupefyingly huge
Whether it can happen without an unambiguous, in-your-face defeat and occupation... That's much harder.
E.g. 19,000 teachers from France; 20,000 doctors from the Philippines; 30,000 nurses from Thailand; 5,000 builders from Peru - obviously those won't be the figures but if the million people arriving are broken down it'd help the Gov't.
Any new developments over Nicola's travails, BTW?
In the run-up to last week’s local elections Paul Bettison, the Conservative leader of Bracknell Forest council, was asked by Tory HQ to predict how the party would fare. Before polling day the party controlled 37 out of the 42 seats on the council and, despite the national political headwinds, Bettison was confident that their vote was largely holding up and would return at least 30 councillors.
On the night, the Tories were all but wiped out, holding on to ten seats and losing control of the council to Labour, who won 22 seats. The Lib Dems picked up seven.
As the dust settles Bettison’s disappointment has turned to anger. The Tory wipeout was not caused by a huge collapse in Conservative support — their vote share fell by only six points — but by an effective, unofficial electoral “pact” between Labour and the Liberal Democrats. Instead of fielding candidates across all council seats being contested, Labour stood aside for the Lib Dems where they were in third place and the Lib Dems returned the favour.
Mary Temperton, new Labour leader of Bracknell Forest council, insisted that the party was simply targeting candidates at wards it was likely to win. “Four years ago . . . we diluted our efforts. That did not happen this year,” she said.
But the Conservatives have no doubt about what went on. “This wasn’t even tactical voting — because voters had no choice in the matter,” said Bettison, who lost his seat. “It’s basically undemocratic. People were cheated out of their right to vote for the candidate of their choice.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-election-tactical-vote-labour-lib-dem-coalition-2023-qbd5cw5wg
Lord Hayward, a Conservative pollster, said such figures did not suggest widespread local pacts, arguing: “It was almost co-ordination by the voters, rather than by the parties.”
Loads from HK
Loads of student visas - government target is 600k students pa
Good Sunder Katwala thread on it here
https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1656792134664568832
The girl on the right (As we look at it) / her left has an extraordinarily long forearm. Also no thumbs showing, though they could be hidden.
Perhaps it is a real photo though and I'm doing a disservice.
Also agree re Indies. In Guildford the Indies went for it, fighting every seat. I thought they might cause the LDs to lose seats. On the contrary the Indies lost seats instead to the Tories. The Tories actually did better in Guildford than the overall result suggests because they also lost 6 seats in one enclave that everyone was expecting (5 to LDs). If it wasn't for those the result would have looked good for the Tories and they still made net gains.
It looked similar in Torbay (would be interested in @MarqueeMark comments). Contrary to Tory spin the LDs made gains, it is just the Tories also did so to gain control at the expense of the Indies.
In these places it was the Indies performance that really made it possible for the LDs and Tories respectively to gain control of these councils
It would do a brilliant job of annoying everyone. Righties by saying that whatever they do is largely irrelevant and Lefties for saying that the long runs of Conservative government are basically their fault.
In fact, if he’d accepted a fixed penalty, it wouldn’t be in the news.
Starmer's majority hopes therefore likely rest on Wales and Scotland, if Labour increases its lead on seats in Wales and most importantly regains some seats in Scotland from the SNP then he could still get a narrow Labour majority UK wide as Wilson did in 1964 (also while failing to get a majority in England).
I put a ten word prompt into the latest version of Midjourney (which is now mindblowingly good). Images so good roger - a professional - wondered who the photographer might be
This is where we are. I could have put those on Twitter and said “omg Russia is using devastated Ukraine as location for fashion shoots” and - judging by the reaction here - 90% of people would have believed it. And why not? Unless you examine with unceasing care the images are entirely convincing. Even at the granular level you cannot be sure. It’s a guess either way
That is where we are. Welcome to the deepfake world of Total Untruth (and also the end of photography, modelling, location scouts, vogue shoots etc)
I think this means the UK will necessarily be more invested in high immigration outside of the EU than it was as a member. It no longer has the choice.
Agree that it illustrates how easily people can be fooled on Socials - 'twas ever thus with words, but now images add a new dimension.
"The regulation states that speedometers must never underreport a vehicle's speed, while it must never overreport by more than 110% of the actual speed + 6.25mph.
So if you’re going 40mph, your speedometer may read up to 50.25mph - but it can never read less than 40mph."
https://www.startrescue.co.uk/breakdown-cover/motoring-advice/safety-and-security/how-accurate-is-my-speedometer
2.5% fatality rate at 20mph. 20% at 30mph.
At higher speeds, a big chunk of the stopping distance is your reaction, so unless you're a former fighter pilot (ahem), it would be difficult to justify boosting it to 80mph.
Or do most stay ?
Fact is fake AI photos are now way beyond the uncanny valley and living amongst us
Advertising as we know it is finished, for a start
The easiest way to check your spedo, is to have a passenger with a GPS (almost all phones now have this), while you drive at a steady speed, preferably with cruise control.
It’s illegal for your spedo to read under, so manufacturers traditionally made them read 5-10% over to avoid trouble. That said, most modern cars with digital readouts are a lot more accurate.
Edit: I see that indeed, yes it was.
I think the expectation is that drivers moderate their speed in 20mph zones but not necessarily drive at less than 20mph. The archbishop was perhaps unlucky.
Speed limits logically should be an absolute maximum: as fast as is safe but no more than this. And set relatively high. Drivers however treat them as recommended speeds and they should be OK as long as they don't exceed the limits massively. So you have to set limits low to get average speeds down.
We feel on this account to be in a completely crazy circular motion in which ever rising numbers of migrants are needed to keep the show on the road, which in turn leads to further need of further numbers to keep the show on the road. But there are still vast numbers of vacancies in essential services of all sorts, and 5 million people of working age not working.
How many housing units were completed last year?
"One who moves too hurriedly misses the way" - Proverbs 19:2
Hence even lowish paid immigrants working can improve the overall average. Making up numbers, adding four percent to the number of workers only adds three percent to the number of mouths to feed.
We wonder if the thunder
Is ever really gonna begin, begin, begin'
Yes, at some point, there will need to be radical solutions.
My suggestion, would be a variation on how immigration works in where I live. If there’s a need for low-skilled immigrants, you offer a number of single people under 30 from most countries, a two-year non-renewable work permit. You’d need to limit the numbers, to protect British unskilled workers and stop a race back to minimum wage that we had under FoM, but the important thing is that these are temporary migrants expected to leave once their visa expires.
Moreover, yes, the students fees vote had Barnett consequentials, but there was a huge row about LDs for Scottish constituencies voting. Swap SNP for LD and it woiuld be much worse today now the issue has been sensitised by Mr Cameron. Not very logical, but there we are.
There are dedicated in-car race GPS boxes, from companies like Racelogic and Dragy, that have a high resolution and will be more accurate still.
I could have spent 30 minutes honing the prompt and getting even more believable images to the extent NO ONE could possibly know if they are real or not
Truth is dead, long live the pre generative post truth
How about we recognise the reality of our demographics means we will have immigration, whatever politicians promise, so we get on with builiding the necessary houses and infrastructure instead of pretending?
https://twitter.com/FaultFinderUK/status/1656621869259276289
https://twitter.com/DrRadchenko/status/1656911407156285441
"Sergey Radchenko
@DrRadchenko
Lol. Prigozhin trolls Shoigu, citing the Defense Minister’s “many years of experience conducting military operations” (Shoigu is widely known for lacking any such experience). The daggers are out. Shoigu’s probable plan is to let Wagner get annihilated."
Commentator Tim Pool responds to The NY Times story, that described his podcast as ‘a far-right vector for conspiracy theories’.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=3ZuH-61ufgk
What are we having for dinner?
My suggestion would be that we ditch almost all the currently permitted "skilled worker" immigration, requiring you to need a job offer at £75k to come.
I would also tighten up the family reunion rules, in particular blocking family reunion immigration unless one of the persons is a British Citizen (not merely someone with indefinite leave to remain).
The student numbers thing is complicated - in theory students shouldn't add to the net migration numbers (for each one who comes, another should go) - what we need to do is to stop the leakage where people come as students and then don't go - given this is currently something like 26% of those coming on student visas it needs fixing urgently.
I say we look at what works elsewhere in the world, rather than trying to re-invent the wheel.