I sometimes post comments on the Guardian's "Comment is Free" under the name "snowflake". I usually vote Labour (though I voted Lib Dem at the last election as a protest but I've got over it and come back home).
On Thursday, Mace, who has frequently been at odds with her party over its abortion stance, launched a profanity-laced tirade apparently against the inclusion of an amendment that would block the reimbursement of travel costs for military members who seek the procedure.
“It’s an asshole move, an asshole amendment,” she told aides in an elevator, according to Politico.
“We should not be taking this fucking vote, man. Fuck.”
This is weather right now...look at humidity and real-feel!!!
When I was last in Bangkok if “felt like” 56-58C
Absolutely horrible. And dangerous
I believe this is the first time in my life I’ve checked temps in Europe to see if they are “too hot” for agreeable travel. It is happening right here right now
Casting my eye over the weather model output I’d say the best place for a holiday in Europe this coming week is Galicia from the Rias Baixas down into Northern Portugal.
26-28C maxes with fresh nights in the mid teens, warm sea water lapping those white granite beaches. Ideal for a drop of Albariño or Vinho Verde.
Or quite high up in the Swiss Alps, Dolomites, Tatras
I’m off to Poland where it will be warm but not, I hope, roasting
Poland looks very decent for the next week.
Shame Poland is a tiny bit boring. But maybe I can find some more excitement *nearby*
It’s been a beautiful day here today, but I think we get your leftover crap weather here tomorrow…
The cannons (dog for scale) next to a monument to some minor victory the Norwegians scored against two British warships during Napoleonic times….
Regarding Squareroot's view that things were equally bad, or worse in 2010: I appreciate that this is a not uncommon view.
Never mind attacking Sunak, Labour should produce a set of posters and adverts which clearly paint the picture of how much better the period 1997-2010 was for the UK than 2010-2023/24 has been. It really wouldn't be hard, some simple graphs or simple statements of things like:
- NHS waiting times - Real income - Debt (seriously, who'd have thought would be a higher share of GDP now than in 2010?) - Growth - Inflation - Immigration - House ownership % - Days lost to strikes
I am sure PBers can think of a few others (number of Cabinet members prosecuted?)
You'd have to exclude the 2008-10 period.
The economy was in better shape, pre-2008, than now.
Not only that but ignore the effects of Brexit, covid and war in Ukraine all in the last 3 years, which are the unique drivers to where we are today
More excuses than a pregnant nun!
Hard to face reality then
I'm sure you were arguing that we should ignore the Global Financial Crisis when thinking about howe to vote back in 2010, Big_G ;-)
In truth, every government faces unexpected events. Labour had 9/11, 7/7 and the GFC; Tories had Brexit, Covid, Ukraine.
But Brexit was entirely of the Conservative Government's making.
You can't put that down as an "act of God" unless your god is called Boris Johnson.
Indeed true, but Big_G was using it as a reason for the Tories utter screw-up of the economy over the past 13 years, so I allowed him that one.
Some Tories, of course, still cling to the idea that the GFC was all Labour's fault (in which case they had a mighty impressive ability to influence the global economy).
Bottom line though, are there any PB posters, of whatever persuasion, who think the Tories have managed the economy at all well?
I'd say that their economic management has been about average, for rich world governments, from 2010 to date.
Almost every rich country has been dealt a rotten hand, over the past 13 years.
Real criticism of the government lies elsewhere, IMHO. The corruption, the infighting, and the very odd sense of priorities, in terms of public spending. The almost wilful ineptititude with which they run institutions.
I am curious about how the Tories get their reputation for good management of the economy? In my adult lifetime the only period of sustained econmic growth has come under Labour (1997-2007).
I entered adulthood in the Thatcher years in the middle of a long recession. I started work on 1988 on a slight economic upswing from a low base but by the time we got to February 1989 things were on the down again and my friends seeking work a year behind me all really struggled to find jobs. We also had a burst of 10% inflation.
The early 90s were grim, we fell out of the ERM, there was a property bust, and I lost my job twice in that period, and of my friends wasn't alone. I will concede that having made a complete pig's ear of everything Major and Clarke provided a steadier hand at the tiller from about 94 onwards but by then their reputation was in tatters anyway.
The we get to 2010. I felt at the time that some austerity was needed for a while to balance the books. It was probably too much for too long even under the coalition, but once the restraining had of the LDs was removed it has been an utter shitshow.
On the other hand under Labour not only did the economy grow, the public realm also visibly improved. The GFC revealed that they hadn't been attentive enough in building up reserves for a rainy day, as in fact they had done in the first few years. But overall 1997-2010 is a far better record than anything the Tories can point at, without even having to bother to look up statistics.
Looking at the current Labour leadership, Starmer seems more of a conservative than anyone in the current Conservative Party. Yet "everyone" is scared of Labour trashing the economy. Why?
Well Thatcher did cut strikes, slash the top income tax rate, rejuvinate Docklands, expand working class property ownership via council house sales and privatise inefficient nationalise industries. Major cut inflation.
Unemployment now at 4% half the 8% unemployment Labour left in 2010
AKA:
Took away workers' rights Gave tax cuts to the rich Allowed the proceeds of a bullion robbery to be laundered through property development Sold off public assets on the cheap Sold off even more public assets on the cheap and pissed away the money
Could you give me an example of a public asset sold cheaply?
Council house. Much more cheaply than any discount for sitting tenant would justify.
And, more recently, up north - vide Private Eye on Teesside.
Most privatization was done at low prices in order to allow profits to those who stagged the issue, BT nearly doubled for example.
are you saying the price wasn't deer enough?
It was a great way to make quick doe
But the greedy ones who made multiple applications, or bought council houses through paper reps, roed the day when they were caught out.
(It seemed very odd to see MPs etc. risking careers for a few hundred quid's worth of shares, as I recall.)
On Thursday, Mace, who has frequently been at odds with her party over its abortion stance, launched a profanity-laced tirade apparently against the inclusion of an amendment that would block the reimbursement of travel costs for military members who seek the procedure.
“It’s an asshole move, an asshole amendment,” she told aides in an elevator, according to Politico.
“We should not be taking this fucking vote, man. Fuck.”
She voted for it anyway...
Not sure what the point of the comments were if not followed up by action. It just makes them look super weak, If abstaining for voting against was politically not an option for her, or too bold for her, better to say nothing.
More interesting to me is the legislative process that results in such unconnected things to be included on a defense bill.
This is weather right now...look at humidity and real-feel!!!
When I was last in Bangkok if “felt like” 56-58C
Absolutely horrible. And dangerous
I believe this is the first time in my life I’ve checked temps in Europe to see if they are “too hot” for agreeable travel. It is happening right here right now
The worst weather I ever experienced was in Hong Kong - temperature only around 36 but with 95% humidity. I honestly thought I was going to die....
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
Sunak's facing Brown's problem - nobody of talent is willing to serve, even if there were enough around in the Commons.
I wonder how many peers will be in his Cabinet after the next reshuffle?
Regarding Squareroot's view that things were equally bad, or worse in 2010: I appreciate that this is a not uncommon view.
Never mind attacking Sunak, Labour should produce a set of posters and adverts which clearly paint the picture of how much better the period 1997-2010 was for the UK than 2010-2023/24 has been. It really wouldn't be hard, some simple graphs or simple statements of things like:
- NHS waiting times - Real income - Debt (seriously, who'd have thought would be a higher share of GDP now than in 2010?) - Growth - Inflation - Immigration - House ownership % - Days lost to strikes
I am sure PBers can think of a few others (number of Cabinet members prosecuted?)
You'd have to exclude the 2008-10 period.
The economy was in better shape, pre-2008, than now.
Not only that but ignore the effects of Brexit, covid and war in Ukraine all in the last 3 years, which are the unique drivers to where we are today
More excuses than a pregnant nun!
Hard to face reality then
I'm sure you were arguing that we should ignore the Global Financial Crisis when thinking about howe to vote back in 2010, Big_G ;-)
In truth, every government faces unexpected events. Labour had 9/11, 7/7 and the GFC; Tories had Brexit, Covid, Ukraine.
But Brexit was entirely of the Conservative Government's making.
You can't put that down as an "act of God" unless your god is called Boris Johnson.
Indeed true, but Big_G was using it as a reason for the Tories utter screw-up of the economy over the past 13 years, so I allowed him that one.
Some Tories, of course, still cling to the idea that the GFC was all Labour's fault (in which case they had a mighty impressive ability to influence the global economy).
Bottom line though, are there any PB posters, of whatever persuasion, who think the Tories have managed the economy at all well?
I'd say that their economic management has been about average, for rich world governments, from 2010 to date.
Almost every rich country has been dealt a rotten hand, over the past 13 years.
Real criticism of the government lies elsewhere, IMHO. The corruption, the infighting, and the very odd sense of priorities, in terms of public spending. The almost wilful ineptititude with which they run institutions.
I am curious about how the Tories get their reputation for good management of the economy? In my adult lifetime the only period of sustained econmic growth has come under Labour (1997-2007).
I entered adulthood in the Thatcher years in the middle of a long recession. I started work on 1988 on a slight economic upswing from a low base but by the time we got to February 1989 things were on the down again and my friends seeking work a year behind me all really struggled to find jobs. We also had a burst of 10% inflation.
The early 90s were grim, we fell out of the ERM, there was a property bust, and I lost my job twice in that period, and of my friends wasn't alone. I will concede that having made a complete pig's ear of everything Major and Clarke provided a steadier hand at the tiller from about 94 onwards but by then their reputation was in tatters anyway.
The we get to 2010. I felt at the time that some austerity was needed for a while to balance the books. It was probably too much for too long even under the coalition, but once the restraining had of the LDs was removed it has been an utter shitshow.
On the other hand under Labour not only did the economy grow, the public realm also visibly improved. The GFC revealed that they hadn't been attentive enough in building up reserves for a rainy day, as in fact they had done in the first few years. But overall 1997-2010 is a far better record than anything the Tories can point at, without even having to bother to look up statistics.
Looking at the current Labour leadership, Starmer seems more of a conservative than anyone in the current Conservative Party. Yet "everyone" is scared of Labour trashing the economy. Why?
Well Thatcher did cut strikes, slash the top income tax rate, rejuvinate Docklands, expand working class property ownership via council house sales and privatise inefficient nationalise industries. Major cut inflation.
Unemployment now at 4% half the 8% unemployment Labour left in 2010
AKA:
Took away workers' rights Gave tax cuts to the rich Allowed the proceeds of a bullion robbery to be laundered through property development Sold off public assets on the cheap Sold off even more public assets on the cheap and pissed away the money
And squandered all the proceeds from North Sea Oil.
Used the proceeds from North Sea Oil to deal with the transformation and modernisation of the economy away from uncompetitive heavy industries.
Uh-huh? Good job Germany had all that North Sea Oil too then.
Germany had an industrial base that had been completely rebuilt by the allies only 30 years earlier. There really was no comparison.
Is there then, in your opinion, any possible comparable country? If not, it's hard to prove your incorrect argument without a window into the alternative universe where a UK PM made sensible use of the North Sea Oil bonanza.
Again, looking at it in isolation is not realistic. In comparison with the rest of Europe the UK went from 'the sick man of Europe' in the late 70s to one of the leading economies at the end of the 80s. We did make sensible use of North Sea oil. The alternative was to continue as a backward, failing, deindustrialising nation ruled by the unions and facing unsustainable challenges from the rest of the world.
Did Thatcher do everything (or even most) things right? No. But on the transformation of the economy on a national scale she was spot on.
Rubbish , it was stolen from Scotland and used to upgrade London and fill arseholes pockets.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
Sunak's facing Brown's problem - nobody of talent is willing to serve, even if there were enough around in the Commons.
I wonder how many peers will be in his Cabinet after the next reshuffle?
Oh, he'll find some people - look at those people who stepped in after Boris's reshuffle even when it was clear the writing was on the wall.
I imagine Ben can see Defence is not going to get its act together under him, there won't be big increases, he's not getting a better job, and they are going to lose, so it's fair to wonder what the point of staying around is.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
"We're not talking imminent legislation or a pre-election Budget giveaway. This is one - potentially - for the manifesto, in a bid to win back those disgruntled Tory voters in the shires and the so-called "blue wall".
And the official response from Number 10 has been lukewarm, to say the least. It's "future-scoping speculation", Number 10 told Sky News, and "requires a different kind of economic environment to the one we're operating in"."
Pure kite flying.
Suspect voters don't really do gratitude for goodies received as much as anticipation of goodies to come.
Are pre election tax cuts all they are cracked up to be?
The news of Ben Wallace standing down is not really a surprise as he wanted the NATO role so hardly committed to a career in politics
He was very much a Johnson supporter, and looking at the future for additional defence spending it is bleak and I expect he will land a very good position in private business once out of politics
The membership will have to look for someone else as he topped their poll in ConHome but that does not fill me with any confidence
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
Another one off the next leader list.
I couldn't really see his appeal, but I struggle with Tory leaders betting because I don't really see the appeal of any of them.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
He's not a rat leaving a sinking ship. He stepped out of line. What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack. 2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios". 3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons that are sent to a mafia state (and in this case, to one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...without any powerful figures taking a cream off or misdirecting or misappropriating anything for personal enrichment...
Don't expect them to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries, which seems to have increased in the past few weeks.
Hard to think of any previous case of a country demanding to be allowed into a club. Britain didn't do it when De Gaulle told them their tongues had a brown version of the stars and stripes on and therefore they wouldn't be welcome in the EEC.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
He's not a rat leaving a sinking ship. He stepped out of line. What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack. 2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios". 3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons sent to a mafia state (and in this case, one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...
...or to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
Your wee pal in Moscow has been running a gangster state for 20 years, stealing parts of its neighbours' countries.
Regarding Squareroot's view that things were equally bad, or worse in 2010: I appreciate that this is a not uncommon view.
Never mind attacking Sunak, Labour should produce a set of posters and adverts which clearly paint the picture of how much better the period 1997-2010 was for the UK than 2010-2023/24 has been. It really wouldn't be hard, some simple graphs or simple statements of things like:
- NHS waiting times - Real income - Debt (seriously, who'd have thought would be a higher share of GDP now than in 2010?) - Growth - Inflation - Immigration - House ownership % - Days lost to strikes
I am sure PBers can think of a few others (number of Cabinet members prosecuted?)
You'd have to exclude the 2008-10 period.
The economy was in better shape, pre-2008, than now.
Not only that but ignore the effects of Brexit, covid and war in Ukraine all in the last 3 years, which are the unique drivers to where we are today
More excuses than a pregnant nun!
Hard to face reality then
I'm sure you were arguing that we should ignore the Global Financial Crisis when thinking about howe to vote back in 2010, Big_G ;-)
In truth, every government faces unexpected events. Labour had 9/11, 7/7 and the GFC; Tories had Brexit, Covid, Ukraine.
But Brexit was entirely of the Conservative Government's making.
You can't put that down as an "act of God" unless your god is called Boris Johnson.
Indeed true, but Big_G was using it as a reason for the Tories utter screw-up of the economy over the past 13 years, so I allowed him that one.
Some Tories, of course, still cling to the idea that the GFC was all Labour's fault (in which case they had a mighty impressive ability to influence the global economy).
Bottom line though, are there any PB posters, of whatever persuasion, who think the Tories have managed the economy at all well?
I'd say that their economic management has been about average, for rich world governments, from 2010 to date.
Almost every rich country has been dealt a rotten hand, over the past 13 years.
Real criticism of the government lies elsewhere, IMHO. The corruption, the infighting, and the very odd sense of priorities, in terms of public spending. The almost wilful ineptititude with which they run institutions.
I am curious about how the Tories get their reputation for good management of the economy? In my adult lifetime the only period of sustained econmic growth has come under Labour (1997-2007).
I entered adulthood in the Thatcher years in the middle of a long recession. I started work on 1988 on a slight economic upswing from a low base but by the time we got to February 1989 things were on the down again and my friends seeking work a year behind me all really struggled to find jobs. We also had a burst of 10% inflation.
The early 90s were grim, we fell out of the ERM, there was a property bust, and I lost my job twice in that period, and of my friends wasn't alone. I will concede that having made a complete pig's ear of everything Major and Clarke provided a steadier hand at the tiller from about 94 onwards but by then their reputation was in tatters anyway.
The we get to 2010. I felt at the time that some austerity was needed for a while to balance the books. It was probably too much for too long even under the coalition, but once the restraining had of the LDs was removed it has been an utter shitshow.
On the other hand under Labour not only did the economy grow, the public realm also visibly improved. The GFC revealed that they hadn't been attentive enough in building up reserves for a rainy day, as in fact they had done in the first few years. But overall 1997-2010 is a far better record than anything the Tories can point at, without even having to bother to look up statistics.
Looking at the current Labour leadership, Starmer seems more of a conservative than anyone in the current Conservative Party. Yet "everyone" is scared of Labour trashing the economy. Why?
Well Thatcher did cut strikes, slash the top income tax rate, rejuvinate Docklands, expand working class property ownership via council house sales and privatise inefficient nationalise industries. Major cut inflation.
Unemployment now at 4% half the 8% unemployment Labour left in 2010
AKA:
Took away workers' rights Gave tax cuts to the rich Allowed the proceeds of a bullion robbery to be laundered through property development Sold off public assets on the cheap Sold off even more public assets on the cheap and pissed away the money
And squandered all the proceeds from North Sea Oil.
Used the proceeds from North Sea Oil to deal with the transformation and modernisation of the economy away from uncompetitive heavy industries.
Uh-huh? Good job Germany had all that North Sea Oil too then.
Germany had an industrial base that had been completely rebuilt by the allies only 30 years earlier. There really was no comparison.
Is there then, in your opinion, any possible comparable country? If not, it's hard to prove your incorrect argument without a window into the alternative universe where a UK PM made sensible use of the North Sea Oil bonanza.
Again, looking at it in isolation is not realistic. In comparison with the rest of Europe the UK went from 'the sick man of Europe' in the late 70s to one of the leading economies at the end of the 80s. We did make sensible use of North Sea oil. The alternative was to continue as a backward, failing, deindustrialising nation ruled by the unions and facing unsustainable challenges from the rest of the world.
Did Thatcher do everything (or even most) things right? No. But on the transformation of the economy on a national scale she was spot on.
Rubbish , it was stolen from Scotland and used to upgrade London and fill arseholes pockets.
Hahahahahahahaha
You know I like you Malc and that I support Scottish independence but you do say some very silly things sometimes.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
He's not a rat leaving a sinking ship. He stepped out of line. What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack. 2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios". 3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons sent to a mafia state (and in this case, one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...
...or to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
Your wee pal in Moscow has been running a gangster state for 20 years, stealing parts of its neighbours' countries.
Yawn. Russia is indeed a mafia state too. Well done for realising.
Once upon a time, lots of aid money went to the collapsing USSR. What I said applies to that too. Obv.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
He's not a rat leaving a sinking ship. He stepped out of line. What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack. 2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios". 3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons sent to a mafia state (and in this case, one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...
...or to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
Ukraine is facing existential crisis as a result of an invasion, they are utterly dependent on foreign assistance to survive and they know that, so have to tread a difficult line of pushing for things, even whilst displaying appropriate gratitude for what they have received, and try to demonstrate sufficient military and civil progress to encourage those sending support to keep doing so. I certainly do not begrudge their leadership for finding that very trying, and not always getting it right as far as diplomatic language goes. We won't and haven't given them all they want or need, and that is going to continue.
As for your aid and weapons comment, no one pretends Ukraine as a state has not had corruption issues before, but I feel pretty confident the americans in particular and the West in general is keeping a very close eye on what is happening with the military assets that have been set - if there was any major shenanigans going on there, they'd be slow rolling new supplies a lot more than they have.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
I don't really understand the snide point about peanut galleries here - a UK defence secretary seems like a perfectly credible candidate, and there was plenty of media talk of him being at least in the running, so why wouldn't be mention how he might be a good candidate? But be it his own qualities or political imperatives it seemed fairly early on it would go to someone else (I believe my initial reflection on it was I assume they'd like a female candidate, as there hasn't been one before).
Regarding Squareroot's view that things were equally bad, or worse in 2010: I appreciate that this is a not uncommon view.
Never mind attacking Sunak, Labour should produce a set of posters and adverts which clearly paint the picture of how much better the period 1997-2010 was for the UK than 2010-2023/24 has been. It really wouldn't be hard, some simple graphs or simple statements of things like:
- NHS waiting times - Real income - Debt (seriously, who'd have thought would be a higher share of GDP now than in 2010?) - Growth - Inflation - Immigration - House ownership % - Days lost to strikes
I am sure PBers can think of a few others (number of Cabinet members prosecuted?)
You'd have to exclude the 2008-10 period.
The economy was in better shape, pre-2008, than now.
Not only that but ignore the effects of Brexit, covid and war in Ukraine all in the last 3 years, which are the unique drivers to where we are today
More excuses than a pregnant nun!
Hard to face reality then
I'm sure you were arguing that we should ignore the Global Financial Crisis when thinking about howe to vote back in 2010, Big_G ;-)
In truth, every government faces unexpected events. Labour had 9/11, 7/7 and the GFC; Tories had Brexit, Covid, Ukraine.
But Brexit was entirely of the Conservative Government's making.
You can't put that down as an "act of God" unless your god is called Boris Johnson.
Indeed true, but Big_G was using it as a reason for the Tories utter screw-up of the economy over the past 13 years, so I allowed him that one.
Some Tories, of course, still cling to the idea that the GFC was all Labour's fault (in which case they had a mighty impressive ability to influence the global economy).
Bottom line though, are there any PB posters, of whatever persuasion, who think the Tories have managed the economy at all well?
I'd say that their economic management has been about average, for rich world governments, from 2010 to date.
Almost every rich country has been dealt a rotten hand, over the past 13 years.
Real criticism of the government lies elsewhere, IMHO. The corruption, the infighting, and the very odd sense of priorities, in terms of public spending. The almost wilful ineptititude with which they run institutions.
I am curious about how the Tories get their reputation for good management of the economy? In my adult lifetime the only period of sustained econmic growth has come under Labour (1997-2007).
I entered adulthood in the Thatcher years in the middle of a long recession. I started work on 1988 on a slight economic upswing from a low base but by the time we got to February 1989 things were on the down again and my friends seeking work a year behind me all really struggled to find jobs. We also had a burst of 10% inflation.
The early 90s were grim, we fell out of the ERM, there was a property bust, and I lost my job twice in that period, and of my friends wasn't alone. I will concede that having made a complete pig's ear of everything Major and Clarke provided a steadier hand at the tiller from about 94 onwards but by then their reputation was in tatters anyway.
The we get to 2010. I felt at the time that some austerity was needed for a while to balance the books. It was probably too much for too long even under the coalition, but once the restraining had of the LDs was removed it has been an utter shitshow.
On the other hand under Labour not only did the economy grow, the public realm also visibly improved. The GFC revealed that they hadn't been attentive enough in building up reserves for a rainy day, as in fact they had done in the first few years. But overall 1997-2010 is a far better record than anything the Tories can point at, without even having to bother to look up statistics.
Looking at the current Labour leadership, Starmer seems more of a conservative than anyone in the current Conservative Party. Yet "everyone" is scared of Labour trashing the economy. Why?
Well Thatcher did cut strikes, slash the top income tax rate, rejuvinate Docklands, expand working class property ownership via council house sales and privatise inefficient nationalise industries. Major cut inflation.
Unemployment now at 4% half the 8% unemployment Labour left in 2010
AKA:
Took away workers' rights Gave tax cuts to the rich Allowed the proceeds of a bullion robbery to be laundered through property development Sold off public assets on the cheap Sold off even more public assets on the cheap and pissed away the money
And squandered all the proceeds from North Sea Oil.
Used the proceeds from North Sea Oil to deal with the transformation and modernisation of the economy away from uncompetitive heavy industries.
Uh-huh? Good job Germany had all that North Sea Oil too then.
Germany had an industrial base that had been completely rebuilt by the allies only 30 years earlier. There really was no comparison.
Is there then, in your opinion, any possible comparable country? If not, it's hard to prove your incorrect argument without a window into the alternative universe where a UK PM made sensible use of the North Sea Oil bonanza.
Again, looking at it in isolation is not realistic. In comparison with the rest of Europe the UK went from 'the sick man of Europe' in the late 70s to one of the leading economies at the end of the 80s. We did make sensible use of North Sea oil. The alternative was to continue as a backward, failing, deindustrialising nation ruled by the unions and facing unsustainable challenges from the rest of the world.
Did Thatcher do everything (or even most) things right? No. But on the transformation of the economy on a national scale she was spot on.
Rubbish , it was stolen from Scotland and used to upgrade London and fill arseholes pockets.
Hahahahahahahaha
You know I like you Malc and that I support Scottish independence but you do say some very silly things sometimes.
Watch as Lancashire mascot Lanky the Giraffe wins controversial mascot race at the T20 Blast Finals Day despite appearing to set off before the buzzer.
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
Gavin Williamson should replace Wallace as Defence Secretary. He can then reprise his injunction to Russia to "go away and shut up". That'll teach them.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
He's not a rat leaving a sinking ship. He stepped out of line. What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack. 2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios". 3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons sent to a mafia state (and in this case, one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...
...or to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
Ukraine is facing existential crisis as a result of an invasion, they are utterly dependent on foreign assistance to survive and they know that, so have to tread a difficult line of pushing for things, even whilst displaying appropriate gratitude for what they have received, and try to demonstrate sufficient military and civil progress to encourage those sending support to keep doing so. I certainly do not begrudge their leadership for finding that very trying, and not always getting it right as far as diplomatic language goes. We won't and haven't given them all they want or need, and that is going to continue.
As for your aid and weapons comment, no one pretends Ukraine as a state has not had corruption issues before, but I feel pretty confident the americans in particular and the West in general is keeping a very close eye on what is happening with the military assets that have been set - if there was any major shenanigans going on there, they'd be slow rolling new supplies a lot more than they have.
Interesting that the troll du jour was called Amazon, after Ben's remark to Zelensky.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
I don't really understand the snide point about peanut galleries here - a UK defence secretary seems like a perfectly credible candidate, and there was plenty of media talk of him being at least in the running, so why wouldn't be mention how he might be a good candidate? But be it his own qualities or political imperatives it seemed fairly early on it would go to someone else (I believe my initial reflection on it was I assume they'd like a female candidate, as there hasn't been one before).
Ursula von der Leyen is highly probable, at p=0.8 IME. But not because she's a woman.
On why pledging getting rid of IHT would be good politics by the Tories:
The Tory-voting baby boomer has some tough choices to make over the next year.
Fearful that their accumulated wealth is being threatened by one economic shock after another, they could choose to support the government’s return to austerity. Or they might consider sharing their lucky gains from the property market and a private occupational pension system that clearly benefits older generations.
With a general election due in 2024, it is clear that Conservative ministers believe their core constituency of voters – those over 60 – prefer the state to continue its withdrawal from the public sphere, begun in 2010 by George Osborne and David Cameron, to restrict tax rises and preserve their wealth.
The author considers the impact of yet more austerity on the nation's decaying social fabric and concludes by wondering whether or not the minted elderly - that majority of pensioners who are owner occupiers receiving both the triple locked state pension and fat defined benefit occupational payouts - might "share some of their property and pension gains for the greater good." This is pie-in-the-sky thinking. The notion that the Tory core cares about anything other than hoarding, multiplying and enjoying their wealth, or that they want any of it given to anybody else (except their own offspring, once they are safely dead,) is for the birds.
If the Government wants to limit the damage at the next GE then it should pledge to abolish IHT, find some excuse to jack up the state pension a bit more (or invent a new handout for the elderly,) scrap any remaining commitments with respect to housebuilding, and pay for it by demolishing the budgets of any Whitehall department that the core doesn't care about (i.e. everything except the NHS and pensions.) I wouldn't be at all surprised if they tried to devise a scheme to save the wealth of homeowners from the random bad luck of ending up in a care home as well. After all, if almost everyone under the age of about 50 loathes you, then why bother with them and their concerns?
Gavin Williamson should replace Wallace as Defence Secretary. He can then reprise his injunction to Russia to "go away and shut up". That'll teach them.
Sir Gavin Williamson please.
Let us not forget he would have been occupying a position attending Cabinet to advise the Prime Minister had he not been forced to resign. From a role so vital it has been left vacant since then. Showing the Rishi really really wanted Sir Gavin there to advise him.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
He's not a rat leaving a sinking ship. He stepped out of line. What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack. 2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios". 3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons sent to a mafia state (and in this case, one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...
...or to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
Ukraine is facing existential crisis as a result of an invasion, they are utterly dependent on foreign assistance to survive and they know that, so have to tread a difficult line of pushing for things, even whilst displaying appropriate gratitude for what they have received, and try to demonstrate sufficient military and civil progress to encourage those sending support to keep doing so. I certainly do not begrudge their leadership for finding that very trying, and not always getting it right as far as diplomatic language goes. We won't and haven't given them all they want or need, and that is going to continue.
As for your aid and weapons comment, no one pretends Ukraine as a state has not had corruption issues before, but I feel pretty confident the americans in particular and the West in general is keeping a very close eye on what is happening with the military assets that have been set - if there was any major shenanigans going on there, they'd be slow rolling new supplies a lot more than they have.
I suspect that Churchill was considered a bit demanding and ungrateful in 1940-42 too. As was Stalin in 1941-5. Existential war tends to do that.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
I don't really understand the snide point about peanut galleries here - a UK defence secretary seems like a perfectly credible candidate, and there was plenty of media talk of him being at least in the running, so why wouldn't be mention how he might be a good candidate? But be it his own qualities or political imperatives it seemed fairly early on it would go to someone else (I believe my initial reflection on it was I assume they'd like a female candidate, as there hasn't been one before).
Ursula von der Leyen is highly probable, at p=0.8 IME. But not because she's a woman.
Wouldn't be enough by itself, certainly. Former Defence Minister, EU head, all very credible qualifications, and handy politically.
Regarding Squareroot's view that things were equally bad, or worse in 2010: I appreciate that this is a not uncommon view.
Never mind attacking Sunak, Labour should produce a set of posters and adverts which clearly paint the picture of how much better the period 1997-2010 was for the UK than 2010-2023/24 has been. It really wouldn't be hard, some simple graphs or simple statements of things like:
- NHS waiting times - Real income - Debt (seriously, who'd have thought would be a higher share of GDP now than in 2010?) - Growth - Inflation - Immigration - House ownership % - Days lost to strikes
I am sure PBers can think of a few others (number of Cabinet members prosecuted?)
You'd have to exclude the 2008-10 period.
The economy was in better shape, pre-2008, than now.
Not only that but ignore the effects of Brexit, covid and war in Ukraine all in the last 3 years, which are the unique drivers to where we are today
More excuses than a pregnant nun!
Hard to face reality then
I'm sure you were arguing that we should ignore the Global Financial Crisis when thinking about howe to vote back in 2010, Big_G ;-)
In truth, every government faces unexpected events. Labour had 9/11, 7/7 and the GFC; Tories had Brexit, Covid, Ukraine.
But Brexit was entirely of the Conservative Government's making.
You can't put that down as an "act of God" unless your god is called Boris Johnson.
Indeed true, but Big_G was using it as a reason for the Tories utter screw-up of the economy over the past 13 years, so I allowed him that one.
Some Tories, of course, still cling to the idea that the GFC was all Labour's fault (in which case they had a mighty impressive ability to influence the global economy).
Bottom line though, are there any PB posters, of whatever persuasion, who think the Tories have managed the economy at all well?
I'd say that their economic management has been about average, for rich world governments, from 2010 to date.
Almost every rich country has been dealt a rotten hand, over the past 13 years.
Real criticism of the government lies elsewhere, IMHO. The corruption, the infighting, and the very odd sense of priorities, in terms of public spending. The almost wilful ineptititude with which they run institutions.
I am curious about how the Tories get their reputation for good management of the economy? In my adult lifetime the only period of sustained econmic growth has come under Labour (1997-2007).
I entered adulthood in the Thatcher years in the middle of a long recession. I started work on 1988 on a slight economic upswing from a low base but by the time we got to February 1989 things were on the down again and my friends seeking work a year behind me all really struggled to find jobs. We also had a burst of 10% inflation.
The early 90s were grim, we fell out of the ERM, there was a property bust, and I lost my job twice in that period, and of my friends wasn't alone. I will concede that having made a complete pig's ear of everything Major and Clarke provided a steadier hand at the tiller from about 94 onwards but by then their reputation was in tatters anyway.
The we get to 2010. I felt at the time that some austerity was needed for a while to balance the books. It was probably too much for too long even under the coalition, but once the restraining had of the LDs was removed it has been an utter shitshow.
On the other hand under Labour not only did the economy grow, the public realm also visibly improved. The GFC revealed that they hadn't been attentive enough in building up reserves for a rainy day, as in fact they had done in the first few years. But overall 1997-2010 is a far better record than anything the Tories can point at, without even having to bother to look up statistics.
Looking at the current Labour leadership, Starmer seems more of a conservative than anyone in the current Conservative Party. Yet "everyone" is scared of Labour trashing the economy. Why?
Well Thatcher did cut strikes, slash the top income tax rate, rejuvinate Docklands, expand working class property ownership via council house sales and privatise inefficient nationalise industries. Major cut inflation.
Unemployment now at 4% half the 8% unemployment Labour left in 2010
AKA:
Took away workers' rights Gave tax cuts to the rich Allowed the proceeds of a bullion robbery to be laundered through property development Sold off public assets on the cheap Sold off even more public assets on the cheap and pissed away the money
And squandered all the proceeds from North Sea Oil.
Used the proceeds from North Sea Oil to deal with the transformation and modernisation of the economy away from uncompetitive heavy industries.
Uh-huh? Good job Germany had all that North Sea Oil too then.
Germany had an industrial base that had been completely rebuilt by the allies only 30 years earlier. There really was no comparison.
Is there then, in your opinion, any possible comparable country? If not, it's hard to prove your incorrect argument without a window into the alternative universe where a UK PM made sensible use of the North Sea Oil bonanza.
Again, looking at it in isolation is not realistic. In comparison with the rest of Europe the UK went from 'the sick man of Europe' in the late 70s to one of the leading economies at the end of the 80s. We did make sensible use of North Sea oil. The alternative was to continue as a backward, failing, deindustrialising nation ruled by the unions and facing unsustainable challenges from the rest of the world.
Did Thatcher do everything (or even most) things right? No. But on the transformation of the economy on a national scale she was spot on.
Rubbish , it was stolen from Scotland and used to upgrade London and fill arseholes pockets.
Hahahahahahahaha
You know I like you Malc and that I support Scottish independence but you do say some very silly things sometimes.
That kind of thing is normal in Scotland. Opposition to a windfarm off the coast of the Isle of Lewis is focusing on among other things the horror that the electrical energy produced will be sold to England.
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
"Doxxing" is equating an anonymous online identity to a real-life name. The only person I did that with was @Antifrank /Alistair Meeks, who disclosed his real-life name publicly on here before he departed. There is nothing there that was not already in the public realm.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
I don't really understand the snide point about peanut galleries here - a UK defence secretary seems like a perfectly credible candidate, and there was plenty of media talk of him being at least in the running, so why wouldn't be mention how he might be a good candidate? But be it his own qualities or political imperatives it seemed fairly early on it would go to someone else (I believe my initial reflection on it was I assume they'd like a female candidate, as there hasn't been one before).
Ursula von der Leyen is highly probable, at p=0.8 IME. But not because she's a woman.
Nor because she is competent, her time in the german defence ministry is hardly a shining beacon of competence
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
I don't really understand the snide point about peanut galleries here - a UK defence secretary seems like a perfectly credible candidate, and there was plenty of media talk of him being at least in the running, so why wouldn't be mention how he might be a good candidate? But be it his own qualities or political imperatives it seemed fairly early on it would go to someone else (I believe my initial reflection on it was I assume they'd like a female candidate, as there hasn't been one before).
Ursula von der Leyen is highly probable, at p=0.8 IME. But not because she's a woman.
Nor because she is competent, her time in the german defence ministry is hardly a shining beacon of competence
When has that ever mattered in this world? How many people fired or forced to leave a senior position nonetheless find appointment to another senior position seemingly solely on the basis that they held one previous so that shows they are qualified?
At this rate I expect UvdL to be the first World President before she is done.
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
"Doxxing" is equating an anonymous online identity to a real-life name. The only person I did that with was @Antifrank /Alistair Meeks, who disclosed his real-life name publicly on here before he departed. There is nothing there that was not already in the public realm.
I don't think you would, but others might speculate who Snowflake was.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
I don't really understand the snide point about peanut galleries here - a UK defence secretary seems like a perfectly credible candidate, and there was plenty of media talk of him being at least in the running, so why wouldn't be mention how he might be a good candidate? But be it his own qualities or political imperatives it seemed fairly early on it would go to someone else (I believe my initial reflection on it was I assume they'd like a female candidate, as there hasn't been one before).
Snide-ism is due to fact that loudest voices pumping Wallace for NATO, were also proclaiming that Joe Biden was (yet again) the evil genius scheming to foil the fondest hopes of Ukraine govt & people.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Hey, he's the one publicly trashing their current position.
But he does seem to have been correct about Twitter being vastly overstaffed.
Watch as Lancashire mascot Lanky the Giraffe wins controversial mascot race at the T20 Blast Finals Day despite appearing to set off before the buzzer.
Brilliant. He does have a massive disadvantage: giraffes are not known for their sprinting,and men in giraffe suits are at a similar disadvantage. I think a slightly false start can be forgiven. Met Lanky last week, AIH. Top mascot.
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
PART 1: ABOUT PB Politicalbetting.com is a UK website about political betting. It concentrates on elections in the UK and US, although it may stray into other countries at whim. It was founded by Mike Smithson (@MikeSmithson) and the admins are @rcs1000 and @TSE. ...1/n
PART 3: TRIUMPHS AND DISASTERS "...There are so many ways to demarcate the different periods of pb.com history. You could look at the great betting triumphs - Obama at 50-1, cleaning up on the SNP in 2015, that [@Andy_JS's] spreadsheet as the Brexit referendum count came in...Or you could look at the different polling debacles. The ICM ascendancy, the period of the Golden Rule [the lowest Labour lead is the true one, disproven in 2017?], Angus Reid and the daily YouGov poll, Ashcroft's constituency polling, the MRP (actually, that wasn't a debacle)..." @LostPassword, see https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4473594/#Comment_4473594 ...3/n
"Doxxing" is equating an anonymous online identity to a real-life name. The only person I did that with was @Antifrank /Alistair Meeks, who disclosed his real-life name publicly on here before he departed. There is nothing there that was not already in the public realm.
Agree with Foxy here, as you are getting too close to the line, about the width of a playing card.
Regarding Squareroot's view that things were equally bad, or worse in 2010: I appreciate that this is a not uncommon view.
Never mind attacking Sunak, Labour should produce a set of posters and adverts which clearly paint the picture of how much better the period 1997-2010 was for the UK than 2010-2023/24 has been. It really wouldn't be hard, some simple graphs or simple statements of things like:
- NHS waiting times - Real income - Debt (seriously, who'd have thought would be a higher share of GDP now than in 2010?) - Growth - Inflation - Immigration - House ownership % - Days lost to strikes
I am sure PBers can think of a few others (number of Cabinet members prosecuted?)
You'd have to exclude the 2008-10 period.
The economy was in better shape, pre-2008, than now.
Not only that but ignore the effects of Brexit, covid and war in Ukraine all in the last 3 years, which are the unique drivers to where we are today
More excuses than a pregnant nun!
Hard to face reality then
I'm sure you were arguing that we should ignore the Global Financial Crisis when thinking about howe to vote back in 2010, Big_G ;-)
In truth, every government faces unexpected events. Labour had 9/11, 7/7 and the GFC; Tories had Brexit, Covid, Ukraine.
But Brexit was entirely of the Conservative Government's making.
You can't put that down as an "act of God" unless your god is called Boris Johnson.
Indeed true, but Big_G was using it as a reason for the Tories utter screw-up of the economy over the past 13 years, so I allowed him that one.
Some Tories, of course, still cling to the idea that the GFC was all Labour's fault (in which case they had a mighty impressive ability to influence the global economy).
Bottom line though, are there any PB posters, of whatever persuasion, who think the Tories have managed the economy at all well?
I'd say that their economic management has been about average, for rich world governments, from 2010 to date.
Almost every rich country has been dealt a rotten hand, over the past 13 years.
Real criticism of the government lies elsewhere, IMHO. The corruption, the infighting, and the very odd sense of priorities, in terms of public spending. The almost wilful ineptititude with which they run institutions.
I am curious about how the Tories get their reputation for good management of the economy? In my adult lifetime the only period of sustained econmic growth has come under Labour (1997-2007).
I entered adulthood in the Thatcher years in the middle of a long recession. I started work on 1988 on a slight economic upswing from a low base but by the time we got to February 1989 things were on the down again and my friends seeking work a year behind me all really struggled to find jobs. We also had a burst of 10% inflation.
The early 90s were grim, we fell out of the ERM, there was a property bust, and I lost my job twice in that period, and of my friends wasn't alone. I will concede that having made a complete pig's ear of everything Major and Clarke provided a steadier hand at the tiller from about 94 onwards but by then their reputation was in tatters anyway.
The we get to 2010. I felt at the time that some austerity was needed for a while to balance the books. It was probably too much for too long even under the coalition, but once the restraining had of the LDs was removed it has been an utter shitshow.
On the other hand under Labour not only did the economy grow, the public realm also visibly improved. The GFC revealed that they hadn't been attentive enough in building up reserves for a rainy day, as in fact they had done in the first few years. But overall 1997-2010 is a far better record than anything the Tories can point at, without even having to bother to look up statistics.
Looking at the current Labour leadership, Starmer seems more of a conservative than anyone in the current Conservative Party. Yet "everyone" is scared of Labour trashing the economy. Why?
Well Thatcher did cut strikes, slash the top income tax rate, rejuvinate Docklands, expand working class property ownership via council house sales and privatise inefficient nationalise industries. Major cut inflation.
Unemployment now at 4% half the 8% unemployment Labour left in 2010
AKA:
Took away workers' rights Gave tax cuts to the rich Allowed the proceeds of a bullion robbery to be laundered through property development Sold off public assets on the cheap Sold off even more public assets on the cheap and pissed away the money
And squandered all the proceeds from North Sea Oil.
Used the proceeds from North Sea Oil to deal with the transformation and modernisation of the economy away from uncompetitive heavy industries.
Uh-huh? Good job Germany had all that North Sea Oil too then.
Germany had an industrial base that had been completely rebuilt by the allies only 30 years earlier. There really was no comparison.
Is there then, in your opinion, any possible comparable country? If not, it's hard to prove your incorrect argument without a window into the alternative universe where a UK PM made sensible use of the North Sea Oil bonanza.
Again, looking at it in isolation is not realistic. In comparison with the rest of Europe the UK went from 'the sick man of Europe' in the late 70s to one of the leading economies at the end of the 80s. We did make sensible use of North Sea oil. The alternative was to continue as a backward, failing, deindustrialising nation ruled by the unions and facing unsustainable challenges from the rest of the world.
Did Thatcher do everything (or even most) things right? No. But on the transformation of the economy on a national scale she was spot on.
Rubbish , it was stolen from Scotland and used to upgrade London and fill arseholes pockets.
Hahahahahahahaha
You know I like you Malc and that I support Scottish independence but you do say some very silly things sometimes.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Hey, he's the one publicly trashing their current position.
But he does seem to have been correct about Twitter being vastly overstaffed.
Indeed yes.
Hopefully he will soon have got rid of all the staff.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Hey, he's the one publicly trashing their current position.
But he does seem to have been correct about Twitter being vastly overstaffed.
Indeed yes.
Hopefully he will soon have got rid of all the staff.
And the infrastructure...
But EM will still have Tesla . . . maybe.
Seeing as how his trajectory might prove similar to that of "the Match King" about a century ago?
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Hopi Sen isn't a name I've seen for a long time. Just saw his name in an old PB thread from about 2009. He's on Twitter but his blog hasn't been updated since 2018.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Hey, he's the one publicly trashing their current position.
But he does seem to have been correct about Twitter being vastly overstaffed.
Indeed yes.
Hopefully he will soon have got rid of all the staff.
And the infrastructure...
But EM will still have Tesla . . . maybe.
Seeing as how his trajectory might prove similar to that of "the Match King" about a century ago?
Somerset have had an amazing season. Would be a surprise (to me, at least) if they didn't win it.
You just had to say that, didn't you!
Sorry! (I thought your team was Glos - though I don't think I've ever learned why a Welshman living in Staffordshire is so involved in Gloucestershire?) In any case, I've had a nibble on Somerset now at 2.63, which I think is quite attractive given the quality of the side and batting first in the evening.)
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Somerset have had an amazing season. Would be a surprise (to me, at least) if they didn't win it.
You just had to say that, didn't you!
Sorry! (I thought your team was Glos - though I don't think I've ever learned why a Welshman living in Staffordshire is so involved in Gloucestershire?) In any case, I've had a nibble on Somerset now at 2.63, which I think is quite attractive given the quality of the side and batting first in the evening.)
It is, but I'll take Somerset as an acceptable second.
From here with Snater bowling magnificently and Harmer still to come on they'll be bloody lucky to get 140.
And my parents were Welsh, but I grew up in the Forest of Dean.
Edit - ugh. Now I'm thinking anything over 100 is good going.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
He's also doing colossal damage to Twitter.
But despite these positives, overall he's still a bellend.
That probably says a lot about the current situation that he feels it’s best to get out
This is shitty behaviour. If he had any sense of duty to Ukraine he would hang in there, the point of standing down as minister now is it starts the clock on the 2 years before he is allowed to go and work for Big Armscorp Inc. Very disappointing.
So perhaps UK Defense Secretary was NOT as great a candidate to lead NATO, as PB peanut gallery thought?
I don't really understand the snide point about peanut galleries here - a UK defence secretary seems like a perfectly credible candidate, and there was plenty of media talk of him being at least in the running, so why wouldn't be mention how he might be a good candidate? But be it his own qualities or political imperatives it seemed fairly early on it would go to someone else (I believe my initial reflection on it was I assume they'd like a female candidate, as there hasn't been one before).
Ursula von der Leyen is highly probable, at p=0.8 IME. But not because she's a woman.
Nor because she is competent, her time in the german defence ministry is hardly a shining beacon of competence
When has that ever mattered in this world? How many people fired or forced to leave a senior position nonetheless find appointment to another senior position seemingly solely on the basis that they held one previous so that shows they are qualified?
At this rate I expect UvdL to be the first World President before she is done.
She is certainly very well connected. Look at her family background. I first took a look at her back in 2014 when she projected toughness regarding the Ukraine, basically saying that if Russia took any f***ing liberties they'd have the German army to deal with. She really stood out. (I wonder whether she's FSB. Haha!)
I'll have to read up on her paternal grandfather, Carl Albrecht. Sounds as though he put a mystical twist on autogenic stuff he got from Johannes Schulz. Jesuit? Steinerite (like Stoltenberg)? Both? Neither? I'll find out.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
He's also doing colossal damage to Twitter.
But despite these positives, overall he's still a bellend.
Maybe. He appeals to my long-forgotten schoolboy adventuring soul though. (I know you may have to professionally disapprove of such things!) I'm retired, but if Musk got on the phone then I might un-retire. I think he's on a list of one.
Just when you think The Met couldn't fuck things up any more.
Britain’s biggest police force gathered sensitive data about people using its website to report sexual offences, domestic abuse and other crimes and shared it with Facebook for targeted advertising, the Observer has found.
The data was collected by a tracking tool embedded in the website of the Metropolitan police and included records of browsing activity about people using a “secure” online form for victims and witnesses to report offences.
In one case, Facebook received a parcel of data when someone clicked a link to “securely and confidentially report rape or sexual assault” to the Met online. This included the sexual nature of the offence being reported, the time the page was viewed and a code denoting the person’s Facebook account ID.
The tracking tool, known as Meta Pixel, also sent details to Facebook about content viewed and buttons clicked on webpages linked to contacting police, accessing victim services, and advice pages for crimes including rape, assaults, stalking and fraud.
When confronted with the Observer’s findings last week, the Met removed the Meta Pixel tracker from its website. It said it took “issues of this kind seriously” and was investigating, adding that no personal data “inputted” by people reporting crime - such as their actual messages to police - had been shared.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Why?
As just one example, if he helps get a loony Republican candidate such as RDS (*) into the White House next year, would the damage that's done - to America, to the poor, Ukraine - be worth slightly cheaper rocketry?
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
He's also doing colossal damage to Twitter.
But despite these positives, overall he's still a bellend.
Maybe. He appeals to my long-forgotten schoolboy adventuring soul though. (I know you may have to professionally disapprove of such things!) I'm retired, but if Musk got on the phone then I might un-retire. I think he's on a list of one.
He used to appeal to me, too. I used to be a fan, ten or so years ago. Then came paedo-gate, his reaction to it, and a whole load of other shitty things that make it clear he's in no way admirable.
(Actually, I think it was the first biography of him by Ashlee Vance that started turning me off him. Despite being a hagiography, it highlighted a few warning signs. Musk's rection to it wrt Vance was also odd.)
Somerset have had an amazing season. Would be a surprise (to me, at least) if they didn't win it.
You just had to say that, didn't you!
Sorry! (I thought your team was Glos - though I don't think I've ever learned why a Welshman living in Staffordshire is so involved in Gloucestershire?) In any case, I've had a nibble on Somerset now at 2.63, which I think is quite attractive given the quality of the side and batting first in the evening.)
It is, but I'll take Somerset as an acceptable second.
From here with Snater bowling magnificently and Harmer still to come on they'll be bloody lucky to get 140.
And my parents were Welsh, but I grew up in the Forest of Dean.
Edit - ugh. Now I'm thinking anything over 100 is good going.
Ah, I see. Somerset/Gloucestershire isn't a Lancs/Yorks type rivalry then? (To be honest, while Lancs are my team, Yorkshire are a close second. With Durham and Notts third and fourth. Basically all the major counties I have lived in.)
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Some truth in that, for sure.
Am wondering, how much SpaceX has in common with OceanGate? Obviously huge difference in order of magnitude, but still a question worth asking.
Especially given that (wo)manned space-flight has proven extremely hazardous, as for example the Challenger disaster, with known risks at least as risky as deep-ocean exportation if not more so.
Speaking of questions, how do PBers with actual expertise & knowledge, rate the various private, or public/private enterprises currently involved in serious space travel? From best to less-best, etc., etc.?
Somerset have had an amazing season. Would be a surprise (to me, at least) if they didn't win it.
You just had to say that, didn't you!
Sorry! (I thought your team was Glos - though I don't think I've ever learned why a Welshman living in Staffordshire is so involved in Gloucestershire?) In any case, I've had a nibble on Somerset now at 2.63, which I think is quite attractive given the quality of the side and batting first in the evening.)
It is, but I'll take Somerset as an acceptable second.
From here with Snater bowling magnificently and Harmer still to come on they'll be bloody lucky to get 140.
And my parents were Welsh, but I grew up in the Forest of Dean.
Edit - ugh. Now I'm thinking anything over 100 is good going.
Ah, I see. Somerset/Gloucestershire isn't a Lancs/Yorks type rivalry then? (To be honest, while Lancs are my team, Yorkshire are a close second. With Durham and Notts third and fourth. Basically all the major counties I have lived in.)
They'll cruise 140, easily. Come on Somerset!
Oh yes, there is, but we like each other even if we needle each other a bit and always want our own side to win when we're playing for bragging rights.
And also, it would piss off the advocates of the Hundred that a county they're trying to get rid of wins, which would be reason enough on its own.
Edit - not that I dislike Essex, far from it. I have a lot of time for them. But I would love to see Somerset win this.
Then I shall be very happy if Essex win the Championship.
And to be fair Snater has bowled like a man possessed here and does not really deserve to be on the losing side.
Yes yes, rats leaving a sinking ship and all that, but only about 1/4 of the Cabinet were MPs before 2010, Wallace included, so he's practically a veteran compared to most of them.
He's not a rat leaving a sinking ship. He stepped out of line. What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack. 2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios". 3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons that are sent to a mafia state (and in this case, to one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...without any powerful figures taking a cream off or misdirecting or misappropriating anything for personal enrichment...
Don't expect them to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries, which seems to have increased in the past few weeks.
Hard to think of any previous case of a country demanding to be allowed into a club. Britain didn't do it when De Gaulle told them their tongues had a brown version of the stars and stripes on and therefore they wouldn't be welcome in the EEC.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
The person who denies climate change is also anti-Ukraine. Quelle surprise.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Why?
As just one example, if he helps get a loony Republican candidate such as RDS (*) into the White House next year, would the damage that's done - to America, to the poor, Ukraine - be worth slightly cheaper rocketry?
(*) Ron DeSantis, not, Radio Data System.
Why? Because I want to know what's out there. I'm also sure it is the best assurance of a future for the human race - which might be a mixed bag.
Trump was oddly sane in his actions in office. (The man can't even do mad screaming loon with any honesty)
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Why?
As just one example, if he helps get a loony Republican candidate such as RDS (*) into the White House next year, would the damage that's done - to America, to the poor, Ukraine - be worth slightly cheaper rocketry?
(*) Ron DeSantis, not, Radio Data System.
Why? Because I want to know what's out there. I'm also sure it is the best assurance of a future for the human race - which might be a mixed bag.
Trump was oddly sane in his actions in office. (The man can't even do mad screaming loon with any honesty)
You mean apart from his bungled foreign policy and the attempt to rig his re-election?
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Why?
As just one example, if he helps get a loony Republican candidate such as RDS (*) into the White House next year, would the damage that's done - to America, to the poor, Ukraine - be worth slightly cheaper rocketry?
(*) Ron DeSantis, not, Radio Data System.
Why? Because I want to know what's out there. I'm also sure it is the best assurance of a future for the human race - which might be a mixed bag.
Trump was oddly sane in his actions in office. (The man can't even do mad screaming loon with any honesty)
You mean apart from his bungled foreign policy and the attempt to rig his re-election?
No I mean that the end of the world didn't actually happen. Trump was and is mad.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Why?
As just one example, if he helps get a loony Republican candidate such as RDS (*) into the White House next year, would the damage that's done - to America, to the poor, Ukraine - be worth slightly cheaper rocketry?
(*) Ron DeSantis, not, Radio Data System.
Why? Because I want to know what's out there. I'm also sure it is the best assurance of a future for the human race - which might be a mixed bag.
Trump was oddly sane in his actions in office. (The man can't even do mad screaming loon with any honesty)
What's nuclear Armageddon later in the 2020s if the richest among our descendants can escape the planet before it becomes uninhabitable because the Sun has become a red giant? That's something that will happen in many millions of years' time - many more millions of years than it took human beings to descend from apes. Just let it happen FGS. Don't worry about it. But if possible, let's not have a nuclear war.
Which I regret as it's has been a source of instant expertise on quite obscure topics. Recently because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine I have been able to learn about gas supply and drone warfare. Also late Roman Britain.
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Why?
As just one example, if he helps get a loony Republican candidate such as RDS (*) into the White House next year, would the damage that's done - to America, to the poor, Ukraine - be worth slightly cheaper rocketry?
(*) Ron DeSantis, not, Radio Data System.
Why? Because I want to know what's out there. I'm also sure it is the best assurance of a future for the human race - which might be a mixed bag.
Trump was oddly sane in his actions in office. (The man can't even do mad screaming loon with any honesty)
What's nuclear Armageddon later in the 2020s if the richest among our descendants in many millions of years' time - many more millions of years than it took human beings to descend from apes - can escape the planet before the Sun becomes a red giant?
Which I regret as it's has been a source of instant expertise on quite obscure topics. Recently because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine I have been able to learn about gas supply and drone warfare. Also late Roman Britain.
I'm intrigued. How has the Russian invasion of Ukraine helped you to learn about late Roman Britain via Twitter?
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Some truth in that, for sure.
Am wondering, how much SpaceX has in common with OceanGate? Obviously huge difference in order of magnitude, but still a question worth asking.
Especially given that (wo)manned space-flight has proven extremely hazardous, as for example the Challenger disaster, with known risks at least as risky as deep-ocean exportation if not more so.
Speaking of questions, how do PBers with actual expertise & knowledge, rate the various private, or public/private enterprises currently involved in serious space travel? From best to less-best, etc., etc.?
I don't have actual expertise in space, but have been following the industry for decades.
Here's some quick thoughts:
*) SpaceX. The obvious frontrunner, but is spending humongous amounts on Starlink and SH/SS, and relies heavily on US government money. It has had some amazing achievements, but for the moment Mars remains a pipedream.
*) ULA. Old, staid and reliable. Much depends on their new Vulcan rocket. The US government will want them to continue in the market for as long as there is not another reliable launcher for large payloads (so SpaceX don't get all monopolistic... like ULA...). The US government is willing to pay massively for reliability. Strategy hampered by a lack of interest by Boeing, their co-owner.
*) ESA / ArianeSpace. Old, reliable and has little future strategic direction. Lucked out somewhat with Ariane 4 and 5 being just what the market wanted - until SpaceX came along. Will remain making rockets as Europe does not want a repeat of the Symphonie mess.
*) Blue Origin. Much derided by mindless SpaceX fans, this is one to watch. Allegedly has lots of hidden projects on the go, as well as NASA contract for a second Moon lander. Or it may all fail.
*) NASA. The decision to go ahead with the Artemis missions has finally given them some focus. But I fear it's a case of too little money being spread over too many projects. SLS is an issue for this (as is Congress...), but until the US gets another working heavy-lift vehicle, it should stay.
*) China. No idea. There are some interesting small space startups, including one that got the first methane rocket into space last week. CNSA have grand plans, and a small space station, but have only a couple of crewed missions a year.
*) India. Small and plucky, batting well above its weight. One to watch. Looking forward to their first crewed launch.
*) Japan (JAXA). Has had some successes, but seems to suffer from a lack of focus. Also has some failures (including a second-stage motor this week, which let go fairly spectacularly on the test stand). Desperately need sa strategy and funding to match if it wants to achieve much.
*) RocketLab. A brilliant and fun - and more unusually, successful - space launch company. 37 launches, with 3 failures. Their leader, Beck, is as interested in Venus as Musk is in Mars. And unlike Musk, I think he means it.
There are various other small launch companies on the market (over 100, in fact). Expect a massive winnowing out of these, sadly including the two main UK ones (Syrora/Orbex).
Musk(m)Elon should arrange a joint (!) fundraiser with his fellow Puntinist, the MyPillow seditionista?
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
I see you are another sufferer of Musk Derangement Syndrome. Tesla stock is up 160% this year, and nobody predicting the demise of Twitter has been correct so far.
Why are you so keen to defend Musk? There is *lots* to criticise him for; especially in the social and political spheres. Much (though not all) of that criticism is valid.
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
Musk is doing space travel in a really exciting way. I think I could forgive most things in return for that
Some truth in that, for sure.
Am wondering, how much SpaceX has in common with OceanGate? Obviously huge difference in order of magnitude, but still a question worth asking.
Especially given that (wo)manned space-flight has proven extremely hazardous, as for example the Challenger disaster, with known risks at least as risky as deep-ocean exportation if not more so.
Speaking of questions, how do PBers with actual expertise & knowledge, rate the various private, or public/private enterprises currently involved in serious space travel? From best to less-best, etc., etc.?
I don't have actual expertise in space, but have been following the industry for decades.
Here's some quick thoughts:
*) SpaceX. The obvious frontrunner, but is spending humongous amounts on Starlink and SH/SS, and relies heavily on US government money. It has had some amazing achievements, but for the moment Mars remains a pipedream.
*) ULA. Old, staid and reliable. Much depends on their new Vulcan rocket. The US government will want them to continue in the market for as long as there is not another reliable launcher for large payloads (so SpaceX don't get all monopolistic... like ULA...). The US government is willing to pay massively for reliability. Strategy hampered by a lack of interest by Boeing, their co-owner.
*) ESA / ArianeSpace. Old, reliable and has little future strategic direction. Lucked out somewhat with Ariane 4 and 5 being just what the market wanted - until SpaceX came along. Will remain making rockets as Europe does not want a repeat of the Symphonie mess.
*) Blue Origin. Much derided by mindless SpaceX fans, this is one to watch. Allegedly has lots of hidden projects on the go, as well as NASA contract for a second Moon lander. Or it may all fail.
*) NASA. The decision to go ahead with the Artemis missions has finally given them some focus. But I fear it's a case of too little money being spread over too many projects. SLS is an issue for this (as is Congress...), but until the US gets another working heavy-lift vehicle, it should stay.
*) China. No idea. There are some interesting small space startups, including one that got the first methane rocket into space last week. CNSA have grand plans, and a small space station, but have only a couple of crewed missions a year.
*) India. Small and plucky, batting well above its weight. One to watch. Looking forward to their first crewed launch.
*) Japan (JAXA). Has had some successes, but seems to suffer from a lack of focus. Also has some failures (including a second-stage motor this week, which let go fairly spectacularly on the test stand). Desperately need sa strategy and funding to match if it wants to achieve much.
*) RocketLab. A brilliant and fun - and more unusually, successful - space launch company. 37 launches, with 3 failures. Their leader, Beck, is as interested in Venus as Musk is in Mars. And unlike Musk, I think he means it.
There are various other small launch companies on the market (over 100, in fact). Expect a massive winnowing out of these, sadly including the two main UK ones (Syrora/Orbex).
Thanks for this!
Question - does Estonia has a dog in this fight? Or rather, an eagle, fledgling or actually flying?
Comments
In January.
I sometimes post comments on the Guardian's "Comment is Free" under the name "snowflake". I usually vote Labour (though I voted Lib Dem at the last election as a protest but I've got over it and come back home).
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/15/nancy-mace-abortion-vote-hypocrisy-republicans
The fallout from the decision by House Republicans to include a divisive anti-abortion measure in Friday’s defense spending vote has snared the South Carolina congresswoman Nancy Mace, who has been accused of hypocrisy for voting for it.
On Thursday, Mace, who has frequently been at odds with her party over its abortion stance, launched a profanity-laced tirade apparently against the inclusion of an amendment that would block the reimbursement of travel costs for military members who seek the procedure.
“It’s an asshole move, an asshole amendment,” she told aides in an elevator, according to Politico.
“We should not be taking this fucking vote, man. Fuck.”
She voted for it anyway...
Absolutely horrible. And dangerous
I believe this is the first time in my life I’ve checked temps in Europe to see if they are “too hot” for agreeable travel. It is happening right here right now
The cannons (dog for scale) next to a monument to some minor victory the Norwegians scored against two British warships during Napoleonic times….
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ben-wallace-im-resigning-from-politics-next-cabinet-reshuffle-2023-k0x9st2rt
More interesting to me is the legislative process that results in such unconnected things to be included on a defense bill.
I wonder how many peers will be in his Cabinet after the next reshuffle?
Johnson himself, Javid, Wallace, Dorries, Hancock, I think Sharma, presumably Truss.
Any reports on Patel, Zahawi, Williamson, Shapps?
I imagine Ben can see Defence is not going to get its act together under him, there won't be big increases, he's not getting a better job, and they are going to lose, so it's fair to wonder what the point of staying around is.
Are pre election tax cuts all they are cracked up to be?
I an so angry reading this story about the Post Office scandal.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-massive-and-shameful-post-office-scandal-just-keeps-growing-7rtqvd0kc
The news of Ben Wallace standing down is not really a surprise as he wanted the NATO role so hardly committed to a career in politics
He was very much a Johnson supporter, and looking at the future for additional defence spending it is bleak and I expect he will land a very good position in private business once out of politics
The membership will have to look for someone else as he topped their poll in ConHome but that does not fill me with any confidence
However if anyone annoys me over the next week I will publish it next weekend.
A - Not enough.
I couldn't really see his appeal, but I struggle with Tory leaders betting because I don't really see the appeal of any of them.
What's most likely is this:
1. He got the sack.
2. He said "F*** you - if you sack me, I'll resign my seat and then I'll go around saying stuff in TV studios".
3. They said "OK, here's the compromise: you stay put at Defence until the reshuffle, and you stay put in your seat until the election. Any questions?"
Don't expect many pols or journalists now to ask whether aid and weapons that are sent to a mafia state (and in this case, to one that's undergoing quite an upheaval) always go where they're supposed to go...without any powerful figures taking a cream off or misdirecting or misappropriating anything for personal enrichment...
Don't expect them to comment on Zelensky's gall in demanding this and that from other countries, which seems to have increased in the past few weeks.
Hard to think of any previous case of a country demanding to be allowed into a club. Britain didn't do it when De Gaulle told them their tongues had a brown version of the stars and stripes on and therefore they wouldn't be welcome in the EEC.
Did you see Wallace said he had to go on an 11 hour drive just to be presented with a list? That's what the Amazon comment was a response to.
You know I like you Malc and that I support Scottish independence but you do say some very silly things sometimes.
If they take over before the election, Penny.
Once upon a time, lots of aid money went to the collapsing USSR. What I said applies to that too.
Obv.
As for your aid and weapons comment, no one pretends Ukraine as a state has not had corruption issues before, but I feel pretty confident the americans in particular and the West in general is keeping a very close eye on what is happening with the military assets that have been set - if there was any major shenanigans going on there, they'd be slow rolling new supplies a lot more than they have.
Watch as Lancashire mascot Lanky the Giraffe wins controversial mascot race at the T20 Blast Finals Day despite appearing to set off before the buzzer.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/cricket/66212305
He can then reprise his injunction to Russia to "go away and shut up".
That'll teach them.
But not because she's a woman.
Ons Jabeur
Lost the match and still awaiting breakthrough
Ons Jabeur
What's a losing finalist supposed to do
etc.
The Tory-voting baby boomer has some tough choices to make over the next year.
Fearful that their accumulated wealth is being threatened by one economic shock after another, they could choose to support the government’s return to austerity. Or they might consider sharing their lucky gains from the property market and a private occupational pension system that clearly benefits older generations.
With a general election due in 2024, it is clear that Conservative ministers believe their core constituency of voters – those over 60 – prefer the state to continue its withdrawal from the public sphere, begun in 2010 by George Osborne and David Cameron, to restrict tax rises and preserve their wealth.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/15/its-high-time-tory-baby-boomers-stopped-hoarding-their-wealth
The author considers the impact of yet more austerity on the nation's decaying social fabric and concludes by wondering whether or not the minted elderly - that majority of pensioners who are owner occupiers receiving both the triple locked state pension and fat defined benefit occupational payouts - might "share some of their property and pension gains for the greater good." This is pie-in-the-sky thinking. The notion that the Tory core cares about anything other than hoarding, multiplying and enjoying their wealth, or that they want any of it given to anybody else (except their own offspring, once they are safely dead,) is for the birds.
If the Government wants to limit the damage at the next GE then it should pledge to abolish IHT, find some excuse to jack up the state pension a bit more (or invent a new handout for the elderly,) scrap any remaining commitments with respect to housebuilding, and pay for it by demolishing the budgets of any Whitehall department that the core doesn't care about (i.e. everything except the NHS and pensions.) I wouldn't be at all surprised if they tried to devise a scheme to save the wealth of homeowners from the random bad luck of ending up in a care home as well. After all, if almost everyone under the age of about 50 loathes you, then why bother with them and their concerns?
https://twitter.com/Sime0nStylites/status/1680269208305774592/photo/1
Let us not forget he would have been occupying a position attending Cabinet to advise the Prime Minister had he not been forced to resign. From a role so vital it has been left vacant since then. Showing the Rishi really really wanted Sir Gavin there to advise him.
At this rate I expect UvdL to be the first World President before she is done.
Whose business is also in free fall. Along with yet another Trumpite grifter, namely Fucker Carlson, Inc.
Money can't buy you everything, Surrey...
But he does seem to have been correct about Twitter being vastly overstaffed.
He does have a massive disadvantage: giraffes are not known for their sprinting,and men in giraffe suits are at a similar disadvantage. I think a slightly false start can be forgiven.
Met Lanky last week, AIH. Top mascot.
Just sayin'.
Hopefully he will soon have got rid of all the staff.
And the infrastructure...
@OldKingCole will be happy though.
Seeing as how his trajectory might prove similar to that of "the Match King" about a century ago?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivar_Kreuger
And BTW, Tesla stock is up this year, but only back about where it was last September after a large drop at the end of last year. It is still well down on where it was un autumn 2021.
And I'll express my view on Twitter: it probably won't die (in that the domain name won't die); I'd also say that it will remain a much-used site. But it faces significant issues with both debt and it's owner repelling advertisers. There's a non-zero chance it gets further ruined by Musk's wizard wheezes, and gets bought out by someone with some competence with that sort of company - and especially the advertising market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hudson
In any case, I've had a nibble on Somerset now at 2.63, which I think is quite attractive given the quality of the side and batting first in the evening.)
From here with Snater bowling magnificently and Harmer still to come on they'll be bloody lucky to get 140.
And my parents were Welsh, but I grew up in the Forest of Dean.
Edit - ugh. Now I'm thinking anything over 100 is good going.
But despite these positives, overall he's still a bellend.
I'll have to read up on her paternal grandfather, Carl Albrecht. Sounds as though he put a mystical twist on autogenic stuff he got from Johannes Schulz. Jesuit? Steinerite (like Stoltenberg)? Both? Neither? I'll find out.
Britain’s biggest police force gathered sensitive data about people using its website to report sexual offences, domestic abuse and other crimes and shared it with Facebook for targeted advertising, the Observer has found.
The data was collected by a tracking tool embedded in the website of the Metropolitan police and included records of browsing activity about people using a “secure” online form for victims and witnesses to report offences.
In one case, Facebook received a parcel of data when someone clicked a link to “securely and confidentially report rape or sexual assault” to the Met online. This included the sexual nature of the offence being reported, the time the page was viewed and a code denoting the person’s Facebook account ID.
The tracking tool, known as Meta Pixel, also sent details to Facebook about content viewed and buttons clicked on webpages linked to contacting police, accessing victim services, and advice pages for crimes including rape, assaults, stalking and fraud.
When confronted with the Observer’s findings last week, the Met removed the Meta Pixel tracker from its website. It said it took “issues of this kind seriously” and was investigating, adding that no personal data “inputted” by people reporting crime - such as their actual messages to police - had been shared.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/15/revealed-metropolitan-police-shared-sensitive-data-about-victims-with-facebook
As just one example, if he helps get a loony Republican candidate such as RDS (*) into the White House next year, would the damage that's done - to America, to the poor, Ukraine - be worth slightly cheaper rocketry?
(*) Ron DeSantis, not, Radio Data System.
(Actually, I think it was the first biography of him by Ashlee Vance that started turning me off him. Despite being a hagiography, it highlighted a few warning signs. Musk's rection to it wrt Vance was also odd.)
However, I think it's fair to say Critchley's fingers were at the edge of the ball and the middle appeared to touch the ground.
Still a fantastic effort. Deserved a catch really.
Somerset/Gloucestershire isn't a Lancs/Yorks type rivalry then? (To be honest, while Lancs are my team, Yorkshire are a close second. With Durham and Notts third and fourth. Basically all the major counties I have lived in.)
They'll cruise 140, easily. Come on Somerset!
Am wondering, how much SpaceX has in common with OceanGate? Obviously huge difference in order of magnitude, but still a question worth asking.
Especially given that (wo)manned space-flight has proven extremely hazardous, as for example the Challenger disaster, with known risks at least as risky as deep-ocean exportation if not more so.
Speaking of questions, how do PBers with actual expertise & knowledge, rate the various private, or public/private enterprises currently involved in serious space travel? From best to less-best, etc., etc.?
And also, it would piss off the advocates of the Hundred that a county they're trying to get rid of wins, which would be reason enough on its own.
Edit - not that I dislike Essex, far from it. I have a lot of time for them. But I would love to see Somerset win this.
Then I shall be very happy if Essex win the Championship.
And to be fair Snater has bowled like a man possessed here and does not really deserve to be on the losing side.
Trump was oddly sane in his actions in office. (The man can't even do mad screaming loon with any honesty)
Which I regret as it's has been a source of instant expertise on quite obscure topics. Recently because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine I have been able to learn about gas supply and drone warfare. Also late Roman Britain.
Here's some quick thoughts:
*) SpaceX. The obvious frontrunner, but is spending humongous amounts on Starlink and SH/SS, and relies heavily on US government money. It has had some amazing achievements, but for the moment Mars remains a pipedream.
*) ULA. Old, staid and reliable. Much depends on their new Vulcan rocket. The US government will want them to continue in the market for as long as there is not another reliable launcher for large payloads (so SpaceX don't get all monopolistic... like ULA...). The US government is willing to pay massively for reliability. Strategy hampered by a lack of interest by Boeing, their co-owner.
*) ESA / ArianeSpace. Old, reliable and has little future strategic direction. Lucked out somewhat with Ariane 4 and 5 being just what the market wanted - until SpaceX came along. Will remain making rockets as Europe does not want a repeat of the Symphonie mess.
*) Blue Origin. Much derided by mindless SpaceX fans, this is one to watch. Allegedly has lots of hidden projects on the go, as well as NASA contract for a second Moon lander. Or it may all fail.
*) NASA. The decision to go ahead with the Artemis missions has finally given them some focus. But I fear it's a case of too little money being spread over too many projects. SLS is an issue for this (as is Congress...), but until the US gets another working heavy-lift vehicle, it should stay.
*) China. No idea. There are some interesting small space startups, including one that got the first methane rocket into space last week. CNSA have grand plans, and a small space station, but have only a couple of crewed missions a year.
*) India. Small and plucky, batting well above its weight. One to watch. Looking forward to their first crewed launch.
*) Japan (JAXA). Has had some successes, but seems to suffer from a lack of focus. Also has some failures (including a second-stage motor this week, which let go fairly spectacularly on the test stand). Desperately need sa strategy and funding to match if it wants to achieve much.
*) RocketLab. A brilliant and fun - and more unusually, successful - space launch company. 37 launches, with 3 failures. Their leader, Beck, is as interested in Venus as Musk is in Mars. And unlike Musk, I think he means it.
There are various other small launch companies on the market (over 100, in fact). Expect a massive winnowing out of these, sadly including the two main UK ones (Syrora/Orbex).
Question - does Estonia has a dog in this fight? Or rather, an eagle, fledgling or actually flying?