Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Meh. Came back from a month gallivanting around the world to find I’d accidentally switched my freezer off.
Not what I’d planned for this afternoon
Oh bugger! We did that once, with a fridge-freezer. No matter how much cleaning you do, and no matter how good the enzyme cleaners, it’s toast. Admit this early, throw it away and claim on your insurance.
It’s built in…
Assuming it was full of meat, and now smells like mine did, call your insurance company tonight and buy a load of air fresheners.
Would also recommend removing the body and burying it somewhere in case an insurance assessor suddenly turns up. I didn’t and now have two bodies in my freezer and constant questions from the police about the missing insurance man.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Meh. Came back from a month gallivanting around the world to find I’d accidentally switched my freezer off.
Not what I’d planned for this afternoon
Oh bugger! We did that once, with a fridge-freezer. No matter how much cleaning you do, and no matter how good the enzyme cleaners, it’s toast. Admit this early, throw it away and claim on your insurance.
It’s built in…
Assuming it was full of meat, and now smells like mine did, call your insurance company tonight and buy a load of air fresheners.
Surely you turn it back on and get it all frozen again before emptying it?
The smell that won’t go away, comes from the polystyrene bits of the insulation that get contaminated by organic material.
It might be slightly less gruesome to empty the freezer once everything is frozen again, but you’re never getting the smell out.
I suspect what she means is the right sort of impartiality. Supporters of right-wing reactionary Home Secretaries welcome, anyone else can take a hike!
If she manages through this to turn the police left wing she really will have achieved something.
The British police now are quite leftwing and liberal in some respects. Certainly in terms of pushing for more spending on their wages, supporting Pride Parades, taking the knee, arresting bloggers for 'hatred posts' while arrests for robbery and theft decline etc
The British police are not the ones making laws. But once those laws are in place they are supposed to follow them. If you have an issue with Pride Parades or arresting bloggers then take it up with the politicians who make the laws and set the priorities.
I am no fan at all of the police but if II am going to criticise them (for incompetance, bigotry, corruption and a whole host of other things) I don't want that criticism to be diluted by spurious and politically motivated complaints.
The issue is that too often the police do not appear to understand the laws they are meant to be enforcing and on occasion make up offences which do not exist. When that leads them to arrest people, then people ask why that has happened and whether that may have been influenced by lobby groups or by poor training or just plain incompetence. But either way the police should not be seen as being close to any political or other group because it can appear to - and on occasion may in fact - question their impartiality when it comes to policing matters involving such groups.
And it can lead to corruption - as with the Freemasons - or nakedly political policing, as in NI. Or cover ups - as with Hillsborough etc.,.
You'd think this would be the bare minimum, but it seems incredibly common, and of course if anyone questions it they get incredibly aggressive very quickly.
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Meh. Came back from a month gallivanting around the world to find I’d accidentally switched my freezer off.
Not what I’d planned for this afternoon
Oh bugger! We did that once, with a fridge-freezer. No matter how much cleaning you do, and no matter how good the enzyme cleaners, it’s toast. Admit this early, throw it away and claim on your insurance.
It’s built in…
Assuming it was full of meat, and now smells like mine did, call your insurance company tonight and buy a load of air fresheners.
Surely you turn it back on and get it all frozen again before emptying it?
The smell that won’t go away, comes from the polystyrene bits of the insulation that get contaminated by organic material.
It might be slightly less gruesome to empty the freezer once everything is frozen again, but you’re never getting the smell out.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Meh. Came back from a month gallivanting around the world to find I’d accidentally switched my freezer off.
Not what I’d planned for this afternoon
Oh bugger! We did that once, with a fridge-freezer. No matter how much cleaning you do, and no matter how good the enzyme cleaners, it’s toast. Admit this early, throw it away and claim on your insurance.
It’s built in…
Assuming it was full of meat, and now smells like mine did, call your insurance company tonight and buy a load of air fresheners.
Surely you turn it back on and get it all frozen again before emptying it?
The smell that won’t go away, comes from the polystyrene bits of the insulation that get contaminated by organic material.
It might be slightly less gruesome to empty the freezer once everything is frozen again, but you’re never getting the smell out.
There’s a Brexit metaphor here.
That EU membership leads to an irrecoverable bad smell, and that no matter how much you think you can change things, sometimes it’s just better to walk away from it.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
Senate Dems wake-up and take a cue fr British Labor Party. Read Shadow Chancellor of Exchequer Reeves interview in Telegraph No tax increases and no wealth tax. She is for wealth creation She feels u don’t tax ur way out economic prob. U grow ur way out. VERY REAGANESQUE
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
There’s an awful lot of research out there on hypoxia. It’s a nice way to go, you feel a little high until you pass out.
Most of the research is in aviation, where hypoxia leading to death is something we try and avoid - but it’s well studied, and probably the most humane way of intentionally killing someone.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
I believe the aforementioned military maps have also annoyed India in respect of Ladakh and some of the areas up in the Himalayas which were fought over in 1962 and where tensions occasionally run high. I didn't realise India's border with China (albeit in sections) was almost as long as Russia's.
I do wonder if a future Russian leader with more political nous than Putin will see the benefit of reviving the old alliance with India - this was counterbalanced by Chinese support for Pakistan.
Perhaps the long-held assumption the 21st century would be the "Asian Century" are wrong inasmuch as the assumptions were based on the rise of China - perhaps more accurate may be the rise of India as a global economic power perhaps emerging as a rival to China across Asia, Africa and elsewhere.
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Meh. Came back from a month gallivanting around the world to find I’d accidentally switched my freezer off.
Not what I’d planned for this afternoon
Oh bugger! We did that once, with a fridge-freezer. No matter how much cleaning you do, and no matter how good the enzyme cleaners, it’s toast. Admit this early, throw it away and claim on your insurance.
It’s built in…
Assuming it was full of meat, and now smells like mine did, call your insurance company tonight and buy a load of air fresheners.
Built in is just a matter of about 4 screws. The whole thing then slides forward.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
Nice idea but…human nature, hierarchies and in/out groups. Primate stuff.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
If Boris had done away with parties, he would probably still be PM.
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Meh. Came back from a month gallivanting around the world to find I’d accidentally switched my freezer off.
Not what I’d planned for this afternoon
Oh bugger! We did that once, with a fridge-freezer. No matter how much cleaning you do, and no matter how good the enzyme cleaners, it’s toast. Admit this early, throw it away and claim on your insurance.
It’s built in…
Built in just means it's got the facility to mount a matching panel on the front. You can demount that and reuse it on a replacement, if you have to.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
Isn't CO2 about as bad as it gets? Nitrogen and Helium (and one would imagine therefore all inert gases) seem much kinder.
FPT: If we accept laying debits on ourselves for what distant* ancestors did, we ought to also accept credits for what distant ancestors did. For example, I think anyone who has an ancestor who served in the West Africa Squadron ought to be able to claim credit for that. Perhaps one of you can pass this thought on to the MP from Barking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa_Squadron
(If none exists, I would suggest the UK build a statue honoring the ordinary sailors in that squadron. And I would be willing to make a small contribution to building such a statue, were it in good taste.)
(*I say distant because I think most of us were affected, positively and negatively, by what our grandparents did. For example, three of my four grandparents were immigrants, and the fourth left the South, where he had grown up. But few of us can show either credits or debits, further back.)
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
Nice idea but…human nature, hierarchies and in/out groups. Primate stuff.
Had my traditional yearly antepost Yankee fun bet on the winners of the 4 divisions. It's going OK. Man City (top). Leicester (third). Bolton (2nd). Notts County (top).
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
I've got a system that combines every single voting system into one. Perfect results every time.
FPT: If we accept laying debits on ourselves for what distant* ancestors did, we ought to also accept credits for what distant ancestors did. For example, I think anyone who has an ancestor who served in the West Africa Squadron ought to be able to claim credit for that. Perhaps one of you can pass this thought on to the MP from Barking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa_Squadron
(If none exists, I would suggest the UK build a statue honoring the ordinary sailors in that squadron. And I would be willing to make a small contribution to building such a statue, were it in good taste.)
(*I say distant because I think most of us were affected, positively and negatively, by what our grandparents did. For example, three of my four grandparents were immigrants, and the fourth left the South, where he had grown up. But few of us can show either credits or debits, further back.)
I do love the end to Amistad where the British naval captain writes to the US Secretary to say that the Slave fortress at Lombok indeed doesn’t exist, having just liberated and destroyed it. Fantastically sarcastic point making despite being a film.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
FPT: If we accept laying debits on ourselves for what distant* ancestors did, we ought to also accept credits for what distant ancestors did. For example, I think anyone who has an ancestor who served in the West Africa Squadron ought to be able to claim credit for that. Perhaps one of you can pass this thought on to the MP from Barking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa_Squadron
(If none exists, I would suggest the UK build a statue honoring the ordinary sailors in that squadron. And I would be willing to make a small contribution to building such a statue, were it in good taste.)
(*I say distant because I think most of us were affected, positively and negatively, by what our grandparents did. For example, three of my four grandparents were immigrants, and the fourth left the South, where he had grown up. But few of us can show either credits or debits, further back.)
There are accounts of the Union Army recruiting from the decks of the immigrant ships - literally they enlisted before touching American soil.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
I guess any last words aren't best dealt with by helium though.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
I guess any last words aren't best dealt with by Helium though.
Probably not, something I have however had a look at not because I am suicidal but given my grandmother and father have both got dementia I want a nicer way out if I start that decline
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
Bubble formation is only when nitrogen (and to a lesser degree helium) is breathed at substantially higher pressure than atmospheric - e.g. divers at depth (because the breathed air has to be at the same pressure as the ambient water pressure, else the lungs can't breathe in). A face mask in an ordinary room won't have that effect.
Techne and We Think (formerly Omnisis) have re-established 21-point Labour leads and we should be due an Opinium this evening. They have had the lowest ratings for Labour by some way (40 and 41 in their last two polls).
As for Techne, their latest 45-24-11 isn't unusual. In early January they had 46-25-9 so one could argue for all the huffing and puffing of the year to date, the polls have scarcely moved. Sunak made an initial recovery from the nadir of the late Trussian period but that hasn't really progressed at all in the last 7 months.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
I guess any last words aren't best dealt with by Helium though.
Probably not, something I have however had a look at not because I am suicidal but given my grandmother and father have both got dementia I want a nicer way out if I start that decline
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
I guess any last words aren't best dealt with by Helium though.
Probably not, something I have however had a look at not because I am suicidal but given my grandmother and father have both got dementia I want a nicer way out if I start that decline
Heroin and cocaine
are nasty ways to go, inducing seizures etc in overdose portions. Less than convinced they are painless
Techne and We Think (formerly Omnisis) have re-established 21-point Labour leads and we should be due an Opinium this evening. They have had the lowest ratings for Labour by some way (40 and 41 in their last two polls).
As for Techne, their latest 45-24-11 isn't unusual. In early January they had 46-25-9 so one could argue for all the huffing and puffing of the year to date, the polls have scarcely moved. Sunak made an initial recovery from the nadir of the late Trussian period but that hasn't really progressed at all in the last 7 months.
You feel with Sunak at the moment many otherwise Tory voters are probably just thinking “why bother”. Especially now Reeves is apparently Reaganesque.
A change election that’s just “time to give the other lot a go” has potential to be more overwhelming than one where a party is standing on a very firm actual change manifesto.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
What would happen is the wealthiest would buy their way to office because they would be the only ones able to go out and solicit votes. Imagine an ordianry person and a few mates trying to canvass 100,000 voters or reach that number - the rich individual can employ canvassers, a social media team and can even buy votes.
You may well say that's what happens here now - it's pretty much what happens in America.
If you want a fairer politics and a more representative political system, you have to take the money out of it. The problem is you can't except by violent revolution and terror. If you don't want parties and just want "strong" leaders, you're either corrupting or doing away with democracy - either you get a wholly rigged system whereby the opposition is manipulated out of having any chance or no voting at all.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
What would happen is the wealthiest would buy their way to office because they would be the only ones able to go out and solicit votes. Imagine an ordianry person and a few mates trying to canvass 100,000 voters or reach that number - the rich individual can employ canvassers, a social media team and can even buy votes.
You may well say that's what happens here now - it's pretty much what happens in America.
If you want a fairer politics and a more representative political system, you have to take the money out of it. The problem is you can't except by violent revolution and terror. If you don't want parties and just want "strong" leaders, you're either corrupting or doing away with democracy - either you get a wholly rigged system whereby the opposition is manipulated out of having any chance or no voting at all.
I didnt claim I wanted to keep the political system the same as it is now just without parties Sorry in my view political parties are the cancer destroying our country
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Has dog. Scale can be assessed. Thoroughly approve.
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
They now have too much power over their representatives, and often are too in hock to their own unreprepresentative memberships, but I don't agree parties as a concept are the problem.
When you have nothing but independents you still get factions emerging, only even more parochial, shifting, and personal, than you get with a political party. So the idea getting rid of them does not solve anything.
I scoff at the ideological pretensions of political parties, as they have nothing in the way of coherent values or policies yet pretend they do, but nonetheless political parties provide an idea for people to unify around which has some basis to it at least, they can help mould a particular vision and build on it
And if you want another example of what happens if you don't get chaos when political parties are not officially allowed, look at the Nebraska State Legislature. Required, officially, to be non-partisan, but everyone knows the members belong to and are backed by particular parties anyway. And if you outlawed the parties altogether you'd still get that organisation, only more chaotically.
We the public could vote for other parties or independents if we wanted to, we just don't. We do at more local levels and could further up if we wanted. I support a more proportionate electoral system, but I'm under no illusions it would solve everything though.
I see “Lord” Frost is enjoying the sunlit uplands.
Well, it is one occasion when I do agree with the point he makes there, which is a rare occurence. The years post covid seemed to have sapped any optimism from the country, and even those who used to be able to deliver some enthusiastic boosterism are just as gloomy as the glum buggers used to be.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
I guess any last words aren't best dealt with by Helium though.
Probably not, something I have however had a look at not because I am suicidal but given my grandmother and father have both got dementia I want a nicer way out if I start that decline
Heroin and cocaine
are nasty ways to go, inducing seizures etc in overdose portions. Less than convinced they are painless
Yeah, but you have a lot of fun BEFORE the seizures
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
They now have too much power over their representatives, and often are too in hock to their own unreprepresentative memberships, but I don't agree parties as a concept are the problem.
When you have nothing but independents you still get factions emerging, only even more parochial, shifting, and personal, than you get with a political party. So the idea getting rid of them does not solve anything.
I scoff at the ideological pretensions of political parties, as they have nothing in the way of coherent values or policies yet pretend they do, but nonetheless political parties provide an idea for people to unify around which has some basis to it at least, they can help mould a particular vision and build on it
And if you want another example of what happens if you don't get chaos when political parties are not officially allowed, look at the Nebraska State Legislature. Required, officially, to be non-partisan, but everyone knows the members belong to and are backed by particular parties anyway. And if you outlawed the parties altogether you'd still get that organisation, only more chaotically.
We the public could vote for other parties or independents if we wanted to, we just don't. We do at more local levels and could further up if we wanted. I support a more proportionate electoral system, but I'm under no illusions it would solve everything though.
Kle you were the one as I remember encouraged me to do a header. I don't want to keep our current system as it doesnt work
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Has dog. Scale can be assessed. Thoroughly approve.
Without a glass of beer in the foreground, though.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
Not an easy read this for a sunny Saturday afternoon. But an important one. It's not just that this editor had and enjoyed child abuse images. But that he used his position to stop others investigating and reporting on child abuse and wrote favourably about those who indulged in it.
We discussed this briefly at the time of the BBC story. I’m pleased that the Guardian is reporting further on it, rather than quietly looking away.
It makes me wonder how many people now are doing something similar.
How much of the media has been captured by those who support puberty blockers for children and other forms of abuse. How many of them ensure that sex based rights activists are singled out for abuse by their friends and protect those people who support the continued abuse of children.
I suspect you have added two and two together and arrived at any number other than 4. What has one pervert editor got to do with this unicorn notion of " the media has been captured by those who support puberty blockers for children"? For what it's worth I disapprove of child gender reassignment and pedophilic editors of newspapers, but I don't understand your extrapolation and conclusion.
Hobby-horses. It's like me coming on and typing "That link confirms my view that the British elites think the law only applies to little people not them".
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Not an easy read this for a sunny Saturday afternoon. But an important one. It's not just that this editor had and enjoyed child abuse images. But that he used his position to stop others investigating and reporting on child abuse and wrote favourably about those who indulged in it.
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Not an easy read this for a sunny Saturday afternoon. But an important one. It's not just that this editor had and enjoyed child abuse images. But that he used his position to stop others investigating and reporting on child abuse and wrote favourably about those who indulged in it.
We discussed this briefly at the time of the BBC story. I’m pleased that the Guardian is reporting further on it, rather than quietly looking away.
It makes me wonder how many people now are doing something similar.
How much of the media has been captured by those who support puberty blockers for children and other forms of abuse. How many of them ensure that sex based rights activists are singled out for abuse by their friends and protect those people who support the continued abuse of children.
I suspect you have added two and two together and arrived at any number other than 4. What has one pervert editor got to do with this unicorn notion of " the media has been captured by those who support puberty blockers for children"? For what it's worth I disapprove of child gender reassignment and pedophilic editors of newspapers, but I don't understand your extrapolation and conclusion.
Hobby-horses. It's like me coming on and typing "That link confirms my view that the British elites think the law only applies to little people not them".
Which reminds me...
The elite have always felt that cf that labour minister in blairs governement telling a policeman "do you know who I am" after a traffic incident, think it was harman but cant remember. Yes tories do the same so do lib dems
I see “Lord” Frost is enjoying the sunlit uplands.
Well, it is one occasion when I do agree with the point he makes there, which is a rare occurence. The years post covid seemed to have sapped any optimism from the country, and even those who used to be able to deliver some enthusiastic boosterism are just as gloomy as the glum buggers used to be.
*waves hello*
I'm optimistic. The sun is shining, bright and warm, and it is set to stay with us for a week, at least; meanwhile I'm off to visit the nicest bars and gastropubs in the Welsh Marches for a six day foodie road trip, for the Gazette
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Not an easy read this for a sunny Saturday afternoon. But an important one. It's not just that this editor had and enjoyed child abuse images. But that he used his position to stop others investigating and reporting on child abuse and wrote favourably about those who indulged in it.
We discussed this briefly at the time of the BBC story. I’m pleased that the Guardian is reporting further on it, rather than quietly looking away.
It makes me wonder how many people now are doing something similar.
How much of the media has been captured by those who support puberty blockers for children and other forms of abuse. How many of them ensure that sex based rights activists are singled out for abuse by their friends and protect those people who support the continued abuse of children.
I suspect you have added two and two together and arrived at any number other than 4. What has one pervert editor got to do with this unicorn notion of " the media has been captured by those who support puberty blockers for children"? For what it's worth I disapprove of child gender reassignment and pedophilic editors of newspapers, but I don't understand your extrapolation and conclusion.
Hobby-horses. It's like me coming on and typing "That link confirms my view that the British elites think the law only applies to little people not them".
Which reminds me...
The elite have always felt that cf that labour minister in blairs governement telling a policeman "do you know who I am" after a traffic incident, think it was harman but cant remember. Yes tories do the same so do lib dems
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
I've been on about it for ages, here and elsewhere. I'd like Labour to instruct the Boundary Commission to use the census as the basis for population estimates, rather than a survey of who is currently registered.
I’m surprised that they didn’t use the census to begin with . That seems a much better measure .
Because if based on the census some constituencies would have a lot let voters than others. Mainly inner cities. I wonder which party that might favour
Wait a minute. I just had a brilliant idea: how about a voting system that neither party can game or gerrymander because the delineation of constituencies doesn’t matter?
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
How about a system where we do away with parties....that would be much better. Parties are the huge elephant sized problem in the room
What would happen is the wealthiest would buy their way to office because they would be the only ones able to go out and solicit votes. Imagine an ordianry person and a few mates trying to canvass 100,000 voters or reach that number - the rich individual can employ canvassers, a social media team and can even buy votes.
You may well say that's what happens here now - it's pretty much what happens in America.
If you want a fairer politics and a more representative political system, you have to take the money out of it. The problem is you can't except by violent revolution and terror. If you don't want parties and just want "strong" leaders, you're either corrupting or doing away with democracy - either you get a wholly rigged system whereby the opposition is manipulated out of having any chance or no voting at all.
I didnt claim I wanted to keep the political system the same as it is now just without parties Sorry in my view political parties are the cancer destroying our country
The minimum possible number of political parties is 1.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
Doesnt need to be asylum seekers why make it about that? sections of for example london have less people eligble to vote. Therefore if you apply census stats then you get 1 constituency with 20000k voters and one with 150000k voters
When I was planning my foodie roadtrip I was able to choose the dates, to an extent, and I opted for the first week in September because, psychologically, it generally seems to be sunny then, even if the rest of the summer has been dreck. Like the weather gods cruelly troll us - as soon as the kids go back into school, out comes the sun
Now, I am sure that in reality this is bollocks. Statistically it is likelier to be sunner and warmer the closer you are to the sunniest/warmest times of the year - either midsummer (if you mean sheer hours of daylight), or late July/early August (when we traditonally get the highest temps)
Yet this perception is lodged in my mind. "The first week or two of Sept are weirdly good"
Not an easy read this for a sunny Saturday afternoon. But an important one. It's not just that this editor had and enjoyed child abuse images. But that he used his position to stop others investigating and reporting on child abuse and wrote favourably about those who indulged in it.
Not an easy read this for a sunny Saturday afternoon. But an important one. It's not just that this editor had and enjoyed child abuse images. But that he used his position to stop others investigating and reporting on child abuse and wrote favourably about those who indulged in it.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
Think he’s referring to the actual responses to the census, rather than the projections made from it.
It’s worth noting that the vaccine program showed that projections of local population, by various methods, were wildly off.
Nine months later Smith has been singled out for another undesirable distinction. If the state of Alabama has its way, he will become the test dummy for an execution method that has never before been used in judicial killings and which veterinarians consider unacceptable as a form of euthanasia for animals – death by nitrogen gas...
.. Like many death penalty states, Oklahoma was looking for an alternative to lethal injection, having struggled to procure the necessary drugs as a result of an international boycott by pharmaceutical companies. By contrast, nitrogen is easily obtained as it is naturally abundant, making up 78% of the volume of air.
A team of academics from East Central University in Ada, Oklahoma, was commissioned to look into the option of nitrogen hypoxia, the Marshall Project has reported. It was led by Michael Copeland, a criminal justice professor.
Copeland’s previous experience was as a prosecutor on the western Pacific Ocean islands of Palau, one of the smallest countries in the world. He also worked in the anti-fraud unit of the Oklahoma insurance department.
Copeland had no medical training, and no doctors were involved in advancing the idea of nitrogen as an execution method. His 14-page report was presented to Oklahoma lawmakers, and the method was adopted as part of the state’s death penalty protocol; it went on to be emulated by Alabama..
It's almost unbelievable stuff. Almost.
Distasteful subject, but apparently death by nitrogen hypoxia is fairly gentle. I’ve looked into aspects of liquid nitrogen safety for work and the effects of low oxygen/high N2 is gradual sleepiness, then falling asleep and then ultimately death.
There are probably worse ways to go.
Helium is best for this
Portillo did a documentary on this a few years back. CO2 seemed a fairly gentle way to go.
CO2 would be incredibly bad, build up of CO2 is what triggers the reflex to breath. It would cause hyperventilation and panic. Helium fools the body into thinking it is breathing normally.
As does nitrogen. There have been a number of deaths from nitrogen in enclosed spaces over the years.
Which is why I said helium one of the problems with nitrogen is that once started if a last second reprieve comes in you risk nitrogen bubbles in the blood.
Bubble formation is only when nitrogen (and to a lesser degree helium) is breathed at substantially higher pressure than atmospheric - e.g. divers at depth (because the breathed air has to be at the same pressure as the ambient water pressure, else the lungs can't breathe in). A face mask in an ordinary room won't have that effect.
Argon surely is the way, heavier than air and relatively easily obtainable as welding gas.
In the event of surviving a nuclear holocaust, and knowing my end would be a grim one, I would be hoping I still had a full tank of Argon in the workshop.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
Think he’s referring to the actual responses to the census, rather than the projections made from it.
It’s worth noting that the vaccine program showed that projections of local population, by various methods, were wildly off.
Indeed a lot of us have never returned a census demand. I am one of them
I believe the aforementioned military maps have also annoyed India in respect of Ladakh and some of the areas up in the Himalayas which were fought over in 1962 and where tensions occasionally run high. I didn't realise India's border with China (albeit in sections) was almost as long as Russia's.
I do wonder if a future Russian leader with more political nous than Putin will see the benefit of reviving the old alliance with India - this was counterbalanced by Chinese support for Pakistan.
Perhaps the long-held assumption the 21st century would be the "Asian Century" are wrong inasmuch as the assumptions were based on the rise of China - perhaps more accurate may be the rise of India as a global economic power perhaps emerging as a rival to China across Asia, Africa and elsewhere.
The 3 major economic powers of the 21st century will be China, the US and India in terms of overall gdp. Russia likely won't be in the top 10 economically
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Essentially same playbook as GOP in USA.
Where the basis for political representation for states, districts and other electoral jurisdictions, is total population. Due to slave owners and slave states wanting to get legislative credit & clout for their human chattel (negotiated down to 60% at the Constitutional Convention) which in turn led everyone else wanting credit for THEIR dependents, notably women and children but also men denied the vote).
Republican approach in USA features some calls for apportionments based on voters, either eligible or registered. But mostly efforts to frustrate accurate counts & estimates among urban and other populations questionable from standpoint of GOP vote getting AND suppressing.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Basing constituency sizes upon registered voters is not aome evil innovation on the part of the Conservatives, but rather, how it has been done since universal suffrage became a thing. Equal representation was among the demands of the Chartists.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
Doesnt need to be asylum seekers why make it about that? sections of for example london have less people eligble to vote. Therefore if you apply census stats then you get 1 constituency with 20000k voters and one with 150000k voters
To get down to hundreds of voters from 70,000 it would need to be something like that.
MPs represent everyone in a constituency, whether or not they voted, are registered to vote, or are eligible to vote.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Basing constituency sizes upon registered voters is not aome evil innovation on the part of the Conservatives, but rather, how it has been done for decades. Equal representation was among the demands of the Chartists.
I am not a tory fan and I still dont see how you can base it on anything other than registered voters. I always register to vote when I move.....I opt out of my registration being public....I absolutely refuse to answer the census. Do I exist or not?
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Basing constituency sizes upon registered voters is not aome evil innovation on the part of the Conservatives, but rather, how it has been done since universal suffrage became a thing. Equal representation was among the demands of the Chartists.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Essentially same playbook as GOP in USA.
Where the basis for political representation for states, districts and other electoral jurisdictions, is total population. Due to slave owners and slave states wanting to get legislative credit & clout for their human chattel (negotiated down to 60% at the Constitutional Convention) which in turn led everyone else wanting credit for THEIR dependents, notably women and children but also men denied the vote).
Republican approach in USA features some calls for apportionments based on voters, either eligible or registered. But mostly efforts to frustrate accurate counts & estimates among urban and other populations questionable from standpoint of GOP vote getting AND suppressing.
That's how it's been done in this country, since we got universal suffrage.
Finished early because the exam hall was at risk of collapse.
On topic- it would be interesting to see the split by current views of Brexit. Are the blue to red switchers more Bregretters, or Confident Leavers (Brexit is fine and not in peril)?
I suspect that most people (who, bizarrely, don’t read PB) have largely forgotten about it. We are out and it has not proved as transformational as some promised but neither have any of the downsides manifested themselves. The revisals of our GDP earlier this week removed the final remnants of the “economic disaster “ claim but they also showed that we are doing no better than average. We want a government that can do better and it doesn’t appear to be this one.
Er .... the UK is not "out". Not by a long shot, if you are in impexp. HMG still hasn't sorted out customs. Partly, reportedly, for fear of the effect on inflation.
And the impact on the "united" bit of the UK remains to be seen, notably but not only in NI.
The UK is out, 100% out.
As a sovereign and independent country it is entirely up to us whether or how we choose to "sort out" customs.
We could choose to waive customs checks from here until eternity, and we'd remain out, that's the point of sovereignty we get to choose what our priorities are rather than having another institution determine what our priorities and checks are.
r "We don't really need to worry about all those things we Brexiters were going on and on about for decades" isn't entirely a convincing argument.
Especially when sovereignty over a large chunk of the former UK has been signed away in part.
Except customs checks on EU imports weren't something Brexiteers were going on and on about for decades.
I couldn't care less if those checks are waived indefinitely. So long as the UK can implement its own laws domestically, I have no objections whatsoever to recognising EU imports as an equivalence while not being bound to EU laws.
"We want to be different from the Europeans" *means* customs checks, at the most fundamental level. To stop all those nasty foreign jars of stuff measured in kg, for instance.
Pretending you don't want them is just not a reasonable argument.
No, it doesn't.
I can drive a Right Hand Drive vehicle that is different to Europeans Left Hand Drive vehicles, even if others import and drive Left Hand Drive vehicles.
Or I can choose to buy goods measured in kg even if others choose to buy goods measured in lb.
No reason that can't apply to other goods and services too.
We can have our own domestic standards that we apply, and if people aren't happy with that and import foreign standards, then there's nothing wrong with that at all.
"One size fits all" is one of the worst things about the EU. When the EEC began it was about recognising standards as equivalents, not unifying them, a return to that is to be welcomed.
More choice. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.
The problem is that we are European. Leaving the EU was like Rhode Island leaving the US. That is the only reason why we haven't, as we are required to do by international treaty, put up customs posts. "Sovereignty" is, and always has been, a myth. As soon as we are reunited with the rest of our country the better.
That's not a problem, because its not true.
We are European as in the continent, we are no more European as in EU than Canadians are "Americans".
The UK isn't Rhode Island, the UK is Canada.
As a sovereign country its our choice whether we put up customs posts or not, we are not obliged to do so. Many countries choose not to.
We are not, and have never been, a “Sovereign Country”. Parliament claims to be sovereign, but can only assert that as a result of a Dutch Invasion of England. Sure, it was an invasion by RSVP, but an invasion nonetheless. Many invasions happen after a faction asks for intervention, and you can be sure that if William had failed we’d be celebrating it now.
Britain, or more specifically England, has never been able to operate in a purely sovereign manner. We have always, throughout our history, been part of larger unions. We act at the behest of other European nations, always have, always will. Placing outside the formal structures of the EU doesn’t change that, just gives the government less influence on the decisions that affect us. People who say we are “sovereign” make about as much sense as Freemen on the Land types
I suspect what she means is the right sort of impartiality. Supporters of right-wing reactionary Home Secretaries welcome, anyone else can take a hike!
If she manages through this to turn the police left wing she really will have achieved something.
The British police now are quite leftwing and liberal in some respects. Certainly in terms of pushing for more spending on their wages, supporting Pride Parades, taking the knee, arresting bloggers for 'hatred posts' while arrests for robbery and theft decline etc
The British police are not the ones making laws. But once those laws are in place they are supposed to follow them. If you have an issue with Pride Parades or arresting bloggers then take it up with the politicians who make the laws and set the priorities.
I am no fan at all of the police but if I am going to criticise them (for incompetance, bigotry, corruption and a whole host of other things) I don't want that criticism to be diluted by spurious and politically motivated complaints.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Basing constituency sizes upon registered voters is not aome evil innovation on the part of the Conservatives, but rather, how it has been done since universal suffrage became a thing. Equal representation was among the demands of the Chartists.
As you will recall, Cameron & Osborne first primed the pump by purging the rolls, imposing individual registration, and, arguably the cleverest part, reducing the number of seats so that every constituency would need to be redrawn (this was subsequently dropped, of course).
The intended result was Labour-leaning regions with higher population turnover get fewer seats than would have been the case.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
Think he’s referring to the actual responses to the census, rather than the projections made from it.
It’s worth noting that the vaccine program showed that projections of local population, by various methods, were wildly off.
Indeed a lot of us have never returned a census demand. I am one of them
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
Doesnt need to be asylum seekers why make it about that? sections of for example london have less people eligble to vote. Therefore if you apply census stats then you get 1 constituency with 20000k voters and one with 150000k voters
To get down to hundreds of voters from 70,000 it would need to be something like that.
MPs represent everyone in a constituency, whether or not they voted, are registered to vote, or are eligible to vote.
So I shouldnt count to a constituency as a registered voter is what you are saying because I refuse the census?
Their are lots of areas of london when fewer that 50% of people are not eligible to vote for example so they will elect an mp on a lot less vote than an area with fewer immigrants ineligble to vote. That is a distortion. You can only base for fairness constituencies on people eligble to vote to ensure each area is getting equal representation. Those people ineligble can always apply for citizenship....no country in the world allows non citizens to vote in their national elections as far as I know
Finished early because the exam hall was at risk of collapse.
On topic- it would be interesting to see the split by current views of Brexit. Are the blue to red switchers more Bregretters, or Confident Leavers (Brexit is fine and not in peril)?
I suspect that most people (who, bizarrely, don’t read PB) have largely forgotten about it. We are out and it has not proved as transformational as some promised but neither have any of the downsides manifested themselves. The revisals of our GDP earlier this week removed the final remnants of the “economic disaster “ claim but they also showed that we are doing no better than average. We want a government that can do better and it doesn’t appear to be this one.
Er .... the UK is not "out". Not by a long shot, if you are in impexp. HMG still hasn't sorted out customs. Partly, reportedly, for fear of the effect on inflation.
And the impact on the "united" bit of the UK remains to be seen, notably but not only in NI.
The UK is out, 100% out.
As a sovereign and independent country it is entirely up to us whether or how we choose to "sort out" customs.
We could choose to waive customs checks from here until eternity, and we'd remain out, that's the point of sovereignty we get to choose what our priorities are rather than having another institution determine what our priorities and checks are.
r "We don't really need to worry about all those things we Brexiters were going on and on about for decades" isn't entirely a convincing argument.
Especially when sovereignty over a large chunk of the former UK has been signed away in part.
Except customs checks on EU imports weren't something Brexiteers were going on and on about for decades.
I couldn't care less if those checks are waived indefinitely. So long as the UK can implement its own laws domestically, I have no objections whatsoever to recognising EU imports as an equivalence while not being bound to EU laws.
"We want to be different from the Europeans" *means* customs checks, at the most fundamental level. To stop all those nasty foreign jars of stuff measured in kg, for instance.
Pretending you don't want them is just not a reasonable argument.
No, it doesn't.
I can drive a Right Hand Drive vehicle that is different to Europeans Left Hand Drive vehicles, even if others import and drive Left Hand Drive vehicles.
Or I can choose to buy goods measured in kg even if others choose to buy goods measured in lb.
No reason that can't apply to other goods and services too.
We can have our own domestic standards that we apply, and if people aren't happy with that and import foreign standards, then there's nothing wrong with that at all.
"One size fits all" is one of the worst things about the EU. When the EEC began it was about recognising standards as equivalents, not unifying them, a return to that is to be welcomed.
More choice. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.
The problem is that we are European. Leaving the EU was like Rhode Island leaving the US. That is the only reason why we haven't, as we are required to do by international treaty, put up customs posts. "Sovereignty" is, and always has been, a myth. As soon as we are reunited with the rest of our country the better.
That's not a problem, because its not true.
We are European as in the continent, we are no more European as in EU than Canadians are "Americans".
The UK isn't Rhode Island, the UK is Canada.
As a sovereign country its our choice whether we put up customs posts or not, we are not obliged to do so. Many countries choose not to.
We are not, and have never been, a “Sovereign Country”. Parliament claims to be sovereign, but can only assert that as a result of a Dutch Invasion of England. Sure, it was an invasion by RSVP, but an invasion nonetheless. Many invasions happen after a faction asks for intervention, and you can be sure that if William had failed we’d be celebrating it now.
Britain, or more specifically England, has never been able to operate in a purely sovereign manner. We have always, throughout our history, been part of larger unions. We act at the behest of other European nations, always have, always will. Placing outside the formal structures of the EU doesn’t change that, just gives the government less influence on the decisions that affect us. People who say we are “sovereign” make about as much sense as Freemen on the Land types
On that basis the only 'nations' left in the world should be the EU, USA, India, China and at a push Japan, Russia and Brazil. As all other nations are relatively dependent on however whichever of the above is nearest to them acts and globally how the US and China act especially
The Tucker Carlson/Viktor Orban interview has now had 123 million "views"
If just 1 in 10 of the people who view it go on to click through and watch a bit, or a lot, or all, of the video, that means 12 million viewers
That would be three times Carlson's average rating on Fox News when he was the most popular host there
What is your point? They are both still a pair of ****s.
Because this is potentially a transformative if not revolutionary moment in news media - upending the way it has long been delivered and consumed
You can imagine lots of people at Fox, BBC, CNN, the NYT etc are looking at those numbers and feeling distinctly queasy
But it is implausible that many people are interested in Orban, who runs a country the size of London. Therefore those numbers do not mean what you think they mean.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
I thought basing seats on registered voters long predated Cameron. Indeed it is mentioned as already being in existence in the Political Parties, Elections and. Referendums Act (PPERA) 2000 passed by Blair.
The Tucker Carlson/Viktor Orban interview has now had 123 million "views"
If just 1 in 10 of the people who view it go on to click through and watch a bit, or a lot, or all, of the video, that means 12 million viewers
That would be three times Carlson's average rating on Fox News when he was the most popular host there
What is your point? They are both still a pair of ****s.
Because this is potentially a transformative if not revolutionary moment in news media - upending the way it has long been delivered and consumed
You can imagine lots of people at Fox, BBC, CNN, the NYT etc are looking at those numbers and feeling distinctly queasy
But we knew that anyway, and one of the concerns with a Bond villain taking over Twitter would be the idea of supercharging unregulated fake news. I don't think media outlets should be concerned more than those of us who don't want Bond villains picking and choosing our representatives.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
Basing constituency sizes upon registered voters is not aome evil innovation on the part of the Conservatives, but rather, how it has been done since universal suffrage became a thing. Equal representation was among the demands of the Chartists.
You clearly haven't read the article.
Perhaps we've read different articles. I've read the article, and Kellner's.
This has been the system since 1948. Guess who was in power then.
The Tucker Carlson/Viktor Orban interview has now had 123 million "views"
If just 1 in 10 of the people who view it go on to click through and watch a bit, or a lot, or all, of the video, that means 12 million viewers
That would be three times Carlson's average rating on Fox News when he was the most popular host there
What is your point? They are both still a pair of ****s.
Because this is potentially a transformative if not revolutionary moment in news media - upending the way it has long been delivered and consumed
You can imagine lots of people at Fox, BBC, CNN, the NYT etc are looking at those numbers and feeling distinctly queasy
123 million views is fuck all. The Baby Shark Dance has 13.29 billion views. Either everyone on the planet has watched it twice or, more likely, a number of people have watched it a load of times.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a significant proportion of the Carlson/Orban views were not you pleasuring yourself over and over at the authoritarian soft-core fash that you get off on these days.
Finished early because the exam hall was at risk of collapse.
On topic- it would be interesting to see the split by current views of Brexit. Are the blue to red switchers more Bregretters, or Confident Leavers (Brexit is fine and not in peril)?
I suspect that most people (who, bizarrely, don’t read PB) have largely forgotten about it. We are out and it has not proved as transformational as some promised but neither have any of the downsides manifested themselves. The revisals of our GDP earlier this week removed the final remnants of the “economic disaster “ claim but they also showed that we are doing no better than average. We want a government that can do better and it doesn’t appear to be this one.
Er .... the UK is not "out". Not by a long shot, if you are in impexp. HMG still hasn't sorted out customs. Partly, reportedly, for fear of the effect on inflation.
And the impact on the "united" bit of the UK remains to be seen, notably but not only in NI.
The UK is out, 100% out.
As a sovereign and independent country it is entirely up to us whether or how we choose to "sort out" customs.
We could choose to waive customs checks from here until eternity, and we'd remain out, that's the point of sovereignty we get to choose what our priorities are rather than having another institution determine what our priorities and checks are.
r "We don't really need to worry about all those things we Brexiters were going on and on about for decades" isn't entirely a convincing argument.
Especially when sovereignty over a large chunk of the former UK has been signed away in part.
Except customs checks on EU imports weren't something Brexiteers were going on and on about for decades.
I couldn't care less if those checks are waived indefinitely. So long as the UK can implement its own laws domestically, I have no objections whatsoever to recognising EU imports as an equivalence while not being bound to EU laws.
"We want to be different from the Europeans" *means* customs checks, at the most fundamental level. To stop all those nasty foreign jars of stuff measured in kg, for instance.
Pretending you don't want them is just not a reasonable argument.
No, it doesn't.
I can drive a Right Hand Drive vehicle that is different to Europeans Left Hand Drive vehicles, even if others import and drive Left Hand Drive vehicles.
Or I can choose to buy goods measured in kg even if others choose to buy goods measured in lb.
No reason that can't apply to other goods and services too.
We can have our own domestic standards that we apply, and if people aren't happy with that and import foreign standards, then there's nothing wrong with that at all.
"One size fits all" is one of the worst things about the EU. When the EEC began it was about recognising standards as equivalents, not unifying them, a return to that is to be welcomed.
More choice. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.
The problem is that we are European. Leaving the EU was like Rhode Island leaving the US. That is the only reason why we haven't, as we are required to do by international treaty, put up customs posts. "Sovereignty" is, and always has been, a myth. As soon as we are reunited with the rest of our country the better.
That's not a problem, because its not true.
We are European as in the continent, we are no more European as in EU than Canadians are "Americans".
The UK isn't Rhode Island, the UK is Canada.
As a sovereign country its our choice whether we put up customs posts or not, we are not obliged to do so. Many countries choose not to.
We are not, and have never been, a “Sovereign Country”. Parliament claims to be sovereign, but can only assert that as a result of a Dutch Invasion of England. Sure, it was an invasion by RSVP, but an invasion nonetheless. Many invasions happen after a faction asks for intervention, and you can be sure that if William had failed we’d be celebrating it now.
Britain, or more specifically England, has never been able to operate in a purely sovereign manner. We have always, throughout our history, been part of larger unions. We act at the behest of other European nations, always have, always will. Placing outside the formal structures of the EU doesn’t change that, just gives the government less influence on the decisions that affect us. People who say we are “sovereign” make about as much sense as Freemen on the Land types
What a load of codswallop.
England, or Britain post-union, has been sovereign for almost all of its existence.
Yes we have foreign relations. Always have, always will. So does Canada, who incidentally still have our monarch.
The idea we're not sovereign post-Brexit, because we have foreign relations, is utterly absurd. We don't act at the best of other European nations, we act at the behest of our own voters, and our own politicians.
Even in the EU, we were typically on foreign relations closer aligned to our closest allies like America, than to other European nations. Which is why pooling sovereignty in foreign relations within the EU was such a terrible idea and one that never worked for us.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
I thought basing seats on registered voters long predated Cameron. Indeed it is mentioned as already being in existence in the Political Parties, Elections and. Referendums Act (PPERA) 2000 passed by Blair.
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Have you not understood the thrust of the piece?
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
I thought basing seats on registered voters long predated Cameron. Indeed it is mentioned as already being in existence in the Political Parties, Elections and. Referendums Act (PPERA) 2000 passed by Blair.
Those on the left are pushing it because they believe it gives them an electoral advantage. Simple as that. We have been doing it this way for a long time. No reason to change
The Tucker Carlson/Viktor Orban interview has now had 123 million "views"
If just 1 in 10 of the people who view it go on to click through and watch a bit, or a lot, or all, of the video, that means 12 million viewers
That would be three times Carlson's average rating on Fox News when he was the most popular host there
What is your point? They are both still a pair of ****s.
Because this is potentially a transformative if not revolutionary moment in news media - upending the way it has long been delivered and consumed
You can imagine lots of people at Fox, BBC, CNN, the NYT etc are looking at those numbers and feeling distinctly queasy
But we knew that anyway, and one of the concerns with a Bond villain taking over Twitter would be the idea of supercharging unregulated fake news. I don't think media outlets should be concerned more than those of us who don't want Bond villains picking and choosing our representatives.
So we should ignore this event and its major ramifications - because it involves people you don’t like?!
Rather enjoying the rants by @MaxPB on the previous thread about the consequences of the policies the party he has supported. Broadly agree that the Tories are currently doing damn all for the young (or anyone else really). But the reason they've been in power for so long - and repeatedly - is because people like him voted for them.
Anyway I am sure he will be delighted if Labour brings in a wealth tax on expensive London property and higher taxes for those on 6-figure incomes from the City.
Never mind all that.
A beach. A 13-year old dog. Sunshine.
Simple pleasures.
Meh. Came back from a month gallivanting around the world to find I’d accidentally switched my freezer off.
Not what I’d planned for this afternoon
Oh bugger! We did that once, with a fridge-freezer. No matter how much cleaning you do, and no matter how good the enzyme cleaners, it’s toast. Admit this early, throw it away and claim on your insurance.
It’s built in…
Assuming it was full of meat, and now smells like mine did, call your insurance company tonight and buy a load of air fresheners.
A little meat but mainly fish and vegetables. Don’t like claiming on insurance generally
The Tucker Carlson/Viktor Orban interview has now had 123 million "views"
If just 1 in 10 of the people who view it go on to click through and watch a bit, or a lot, or all, of the video, that means 12 million viewers
That would be three times Carlson's average rating on Fox News when he was the most popular host there
What is your point? They are both still a pair of ****s.
Because this is potentially a transformative if not revolutionary moment in news media - upending the way it has long been delivered and consumed
You can imagine lots of people at Fox, BBC, CNN, the NYT etc are looking at those numbers and feeling distinctly queasy
123 million views is fuck all. The Baby Shark Dance has 13.29 billion views. Either everyone on the planet has watched it twice or, more likely, a number of people have watched it a load of times.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a significant proportion of the Carlson/Orban views were not you pleasuring yourself over and over at the authoritarian soft-core fash that you get off on these days.
Lol. Ok
Why does stuff like this get people so puce-faced and ANGRY?
Misleading title, because if you read the article it isn't talking about voters, it's talking about population, which is not the same thing.
Not misleading at all. In fact, that is rather the point.
If you do it by census, while unlikely it could happen that a constituency has a few hundred eligible to actually vote...we used to call those rottenboroughs
A few hundred voters from 70,000 constituents? Is that where Suella has sent all the asylum seekers?
Doesnt need to be asylum seekers why make it about that? sections of for example london have less people eligble to vote. Therefore if you apply census stats then you get 1 constituency with 20000k voters and one with 150000k voters
To get down to hundreds of voters from 70,000 it would need to be something like that.
MPs represent everyone in a constituency, whether or not they voted, are registered to vote, or are eligible to vote.
So I shouldnt count to a constituency as a registered voter is what you are saying because I refuse the census?
Their are lots of areas of london when fewer that 50% of people are not eligible to vote for example so they will elect an mp on a lot less vote than an area with fewer immigrants ineligble to vote. That is a distortion. You can only base for fairness constituencies on people eligble to vote to ensure each area is getting equal representation. Those people ineligble can always apply for citizenship....no country in the world allows non citizens to vote in their national elections as far as I know
Oh FFS. Can you not understand how this works and that this was introduced to favour the party that introduced it? No amount of sophistry will alter that. Even if you have a point about census dodgers, which is disputable, this was not the motivating factor. As for non-citizens voting, knock yourself out on https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8985/ but that is really a separate matter.
The Tucker Carlson/Viktor Orban interview has now had 123 million "views"
If just 1 in 10 of the people who view it go on to click through and watch a bit, or a lot, or all, of the video, that means 12 million viewers
That would be three times Carlson's average rating on Fox News when he was the most popular host there
What is your point? They are both still a pair of ****s.
Because this is potentially a transformative if not revolutionary moment in news media - upending the way it has long been delivered and consumed
You can imagine lots of people at Fox, BBC, CNN, the NYT etc are looking at those numbers and feeling distinctly queasy
123 million views is fuck all. The Baby Shark Dance has 13.29 billion views. Either everyone on the planet has watched it twice or, more likely, a number of people have watched it a load of times.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a significant proportion of the Carlson/Orban views were not you pleasuring yourself over and over at the authoritarian soft-core fash that you get off on these days.
Lol. Ok
Why does stuff like this get people so puce-faced and ANGRY?
Why resort to this flailing ad hominem?
Because as usual you are claiming something totally unimportant to be revolutionary?
Finished early because the exam hall was at risk of collapse.
On topic- it would be interesting to see the split by current views of Brexit. Are the blue to red switchers more Bregretters, or Confident Leavers (Brexit is fine and not in peril)?
I suspect that most people (who, bizarrely, don’t read PB) have largely forgotten about it. We are out and it has not proved as transformational as some promised but neither have any of the downsides manifested themselves. The revisals of our GDP earlier this week removed the final remnants of the “economic disaster “ claim but they also showed that we are doing no better than average. We want a government that can do better and it doesn’t appear to be this one.
Er .... the UK is not "out". Not by a long shot, if you are in impexp. HMG still hasn't sorted out customs. Partly, reportedly, for fear of the effect on inflation.
And the impact on the "united" bit of the UK remains to be seen, notably but not only in NI.
The UK is out, 100% out.
As a sovereign and independent country it is entirely up to us whether or how we choose to "sort out" customs.
We could choose to waive customs checks from here until eternity, and we'd remain out, that's the point of sovereignty we get to choose what our priorities are rather than having another institution determine what our priorities and checks are.
r "We don't really need to worry about all those things we Brexiters were going on and on about for decades" isn't entirely a convincing argument.
Especially when sovereignty over a large chunk of the former UK has been signed away in part.
Except customs checks on EU imports weren't something Brexiteers were going on and on about for decades.
I couldn't care less if those checks are waived indefinitely. So long as the UK can implement its own laws domestically, I have no objections whatsoever to recognising EU imports as an equivalence while not being bound to EU laws.
"We want to be different from the Europeans" *means* customs checks, at the most fundamental level. To stop all those nasty foreign jars of stuff measured in kg, for instance.
Pretending you don't want them is just not a reasonable argument.
No, it doesn't.
I can drive a Right Hand Drive vehicle that is different to Europeans Left Hand Drive vehicles, even if others import and drive Left Hand Drive vehicles.
Or I can choose to buy goods measured in kg even if others choose to buy goods measured in lb.
No reason that can't apply to other goods and services too.
We can have our own domestic standards that we apply, and if people aren't happy with that and import foreign standards, then there's nothing wrong with that at all.
"One size fits all" is one of the worst things about the EU. When the EEC began it was about recognising standards as equivalents, not unifying them, a return to that is to be welcomed.
More choice. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.
The problem is that we are European. Leaving the EU was like Rhode Island leaving the US. That is the only reason why we haven't, as we are required to do by international treaty, put up customs posts. "Sovereignty" is, and always has been, a myth. As soon as we are reunited with the rest of our country the better.
That's not a problem, because its not true.
We are European as in the continent, we are no more European as in EU than Canadians are "Americans".
The UK isn't Rhode Island, the UK is Canada.
As a sovereign country its our choice whether we put up customs posts or not, we are not obliged to do so. Many countries choose not to.
We are not, and have never been, a “Sovereign Country”. Parliament claims to be sovereign, but can only assert that as a result of a Dutch Invasion of England. Sure, it was an invasion by RSVP, but an invasion nonetheless. Many invasions happen after a faction asks for intervention, and you can be sure that if William had failed we’d be celebrating it now.
Britain, or more specifically England, has never been able to operate in a purely sovereign manner. We have always, throughout our history, been part of larger unions. We act at the behest of other European nations, always have, always will. Placing outside the formal structures of the EU doesn’t change that, just gives the government less influence on the decisions that affect us. People who say we are “sovereign” make about as much sense as Freemen on the Land types
What a load of codswallop.
England, or Britain post-union, has been sovereign for almost all of its existence.
Yes we have foreign relations. Always have, always will. So does Canada, who incidentally still have our monarch.
The idea we're not sovereign post-Brexit, because we have foreign relations, is utterly absurd. We don't act at the best of other European nations, we act at the behest of our own voters, and our own politicians.
Even in the EU, we were typically on foreign relations closer aligned to our closest allies like America, than to other European nations. Which is why pooling sovereignty in foreign relations within the EU was such a terrible idea and one that never worked for us.
When, exactly, has Britain been sovereign? As far as I can tell we have been part of unions for all of that time. The U.K. has not been sovereign since it was formed.
Comments
It might be slightly less gruesome to empty the freezer once everything is frozen again, but you’re never getting the smell out.
We’ll have true equality when dancing at a pride parade raises no more eyebrows than dancing at a village fete.
There are probably worse ways to go.
https://x.com/chuckgrassley/status/1697693257621442620
Senate Dems wake-up and take a cue fr British Labor Party. Read Shadow Chancellor of Exchequer Reeves interview in Telegraph No tax increases and no wealth tax. She is for wealth creation She feels u don’t tax ur way out economic prob. U grow ur way out. VERY REAGANESQUE
We should give this some serious thought. If done right, it could lead to representation that is proportional to the popular vote. While retaining a constituency link. Call it something like Single Transferable Vote.
I think I might be on to something here.
Most of the research is in aviation, where hypoxia leading to death is something we try and avoid - but it’s well studied, and probably the most humane way of intentionally killing someone.
I believe the aforementioned military maps have also annoyed India in respect of Ladakh and some of the areas up in the Himalayas which were fought over in 1962 and where tensions occasionally run high. I didn't realise India's border with China (albeit in sections) was almost as long as Russia's.
I do wonder if a future Russian leader with more political nous than Putin will see the benefit of reviving the old alliance with India - this was counterbalanced by Chinese support for Pakistan.
Perhaps the long-held assumption the 21st century would be the "Asian Century" are wrong inasmuch as the assumptions were based on the rise of China - perhaps more accurate may be the rise of India as a global economic power perhaps emerging as a rival to China across Asia, Africa and elsewhere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa_Squadron
(If none exists, I would suggest the UK build a statue honoring the ordinary sailors in that squadron. And I would be willing to make a small contribution to building such a statue, were it in good taste.)
For an impressive list of credits -- and debits -- in the centuries-long fight against slavery, take a look at this time line: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom
(*I say distant because I think most of us were affected, positively and negatively, by what our grandparents did. For example, three of my four grandparents were immigrants, and the fourth left the South, where he had grown up. But few of us can show either credits or debits, further back.)
Man City (top).
Leicester (third).
Bolton (2nd).
Notts County (top).
Early days, mind.
Famously - https://roundupreads.jsc.nasa.gov/roundup/1648
Reminds me of Trawsfynydd in Merioneth (= across the mountain). It isn't 'traws fynydd' if you're already there.
As for Techne, their latest 45-24-11 isn't unusual. In early January they had 46-25-9 so one could argue for all the huffing and puffing of the year to date, the polls have scarcely moved. Sunak made an initial recovery from the nadir of the late Trussian period but that hasn't really progressed at all in the last 7 months.
A change election that’s just “time to give the other lot a go” has potential to be more overwhelming than one where a party is standing on a very firm actual change manifesto.
You may well say that's what happens here now - it's pretty much what happens in America.
If you want a fairer politics and a more representative political system, you have to take the money out of it. The problem is you can't except by violent revolution and terror. If you don't want parties and just want "strong" leaders, you're either corrupting or doing away with democracy - either you get a wholly rigged system whereby the opposition is manipulated out of having any chance or no voting at all.
Sorry in my view political parties are the cancer destroying our country
When you have nothing but independents you still get factions emerging, only even more parochial, shifting, and personal, than you get with a political party. So the idea getting rid of them does not solve anything.
I scoff at the ideological pretensions of political parties, as they have nothing in the way of coherent values or policies yet pretend they do, but nonetheless political parties provide an idea for people to unify around which has some basis to it at least, they can help mould a particular vision and build on it
And if you want another example of what happens if you don't get chaos when political parties are not officially allowed, look at the Nebraska State Legislature. Required, officially, to be non-partisan, but everyone knows the members belong to and are backed by particular parties anyway. And if you outlawed the parties altogether you'd still get that organisation, only more chaotically.
We the public could vote for other parties or independents if we wanted to, we just don't. We do at more local levels and could further up if we wanted. I support a more proportionate electoral system, but I'm under no illusions it would solve everything though.
Which reminds me...
Cameron and Osborne gerrymandered, yes gerrymandered, constituencies in their favour by basing seat boundaries on registered voters not eligible voters, the upshot is rather a significant perceived unfair benefit for the Tories at General Elections. The article is clear why it was done, and the names supporting the notion are not unserious people.
I know any significant unfair advantage to ensure a Tory win floats your boat, but you can't disregard the article just because you don't like the conclusion.
If just 1 in 10 of the people who view it go on to click through and watch a bit, or a lot, or all, of the video, that means 12 million viewers
That would be three times Carlson's average rating on Fox News when he was the most popular host there
- @viewcode
I'm optimistic. The sun is shining, bright and warm, and it is set to stay with us for a week, at least; meanwhile I'm off to visit the nicest bars and gastropubs in the Welsh Marches for a six day foodie road trip, for the Gazette
Bliss!
When I was planning my foodie roadtrip I was able to choose the dates, to an extent, and I opted for the first week in September because, psychologically, it generally seems to be sunny then, even if the rest of the summer has been dreck. Like the weather gods cruelly troll us - as soon as the kids go back into school, out comes the sun
Now, I am sure that in reality this is bollocks. Statistically it is likelier to be sunner and warmer the closer you are to the sunniest/warmest times of the year - either midsummer (if you mean sheer hours of daylight), or late July/early August (when we traditonally get the highest temps)
Yet this perception is lodged in my mind. "The first week or two of Sept are weirdly good"
A strange glitch
It’s worth noting that the vaccine program showed that projections of local population, by various methods, were wildly off.
In the event of surviving a nuclear holocaust, and knowing my end would be a grim one, I would be hoping I still had a full tank of Argon in the workshop.
Where the basis for political representation for states, districts and other electoral jurisdictions, is total population. Due to slave owners and slave states wanting to get legislative credit & clout for their human chattel (negotiated down to 60% at the Constitutional Convention) which in turn led everyone else wanting credit for THEIR dependents, notably women and children but also men denied the vote).
Republican approach in USA features some calls for apportionments based on voters, either eligible or registered. But mostly efforts to frustrate accurate counts & estimates among urban and other populations questionable from standpoint of GOP vote getting AND suppressing.
MPs represent everyone in a constituency, whether or not they voted, are registered to vote, or are eligible to vote.
Britain, or more specifically England, has never been able to operate in a purely sovereign manner. We have always, throughout our history, been part of larger unions. We act at the behest of other European nations, always have, always will. Placing outside the formal structures of the EU doesn’t change that, just gives the government less influence on the decisions that affect us. People who say we are “sovereign” make about as much sense as
Freemen on the Land types
https://news.sky.com/story/autistic-teenager-arrested-in-leeds-after-police-homophobia-accusation-will-face-no-further-action-12938169
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11063507/Police-force-savaged-crime-commissioner-arrest-army-veteran.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/11/man-who-joined-kurdish-militia-to-fight-isis-in-syria-arrested-on-return-to-uk (later thrown out by the court)
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2020/oct/13/police-investigate-david-starkey-over-slavery-remarks-to-daren-grimes
https://www.caldersecurity.co.uk/only-14-arrests-for-every-burglary-in-england/
You can imagine lots of people at Fox, BBC, CNN, the NYT etc are looking at those numbers and feeling distinctly queasy
The intended result was Labour-leaning regions with higher population turnover get fewer seats than would have been the case.
Their are lots of areas of london when fewer that 50% of people are not eligible to vote for example so they will elect an mp on a lot less vote than an area with fewer immigrants ineligble to vote. That is a distortion. You can only base for fairness constituencies on people eligble to vote to ensure each area is getting equal representation. Those people ineligble can always apply for citizenship....no country in the world allows non citizens to vote in their national elections as far as I know
THAT would be a pretty profound moment in media. If he got 125m “views” on Twitter for Orban, what would he get for Putin?
This has been the system since 1948. Guess who was in power then.
I wouldn’t be surprised if a significant proportion of the Carlson/Orban views were not you pleasuring yourself over and over at the authoritarian soft-core fash that you get off on these days.
American Cheese Arrives - 1941
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOSM2DXY25M
FYI, the guy next to Lord Woolton, to whom he first hands some good old American cheese, is then US Ambassador Averell Harriman.
England, or Britain post-union, has been sovereign for almost all of its existence.
Yes we have foreign relations. Always have, always will. So does Canada, who incidentally still have our monarch.
The idea we're not sovereign post-Brexit, because we have foreign relations, is utterly absurd. We don't act at the best of other European nations, we act at the behest of our own voters, and our own politicians.
Even in the EU, we were typically on foreign relations closer aligned to our closest allies like America, than to other European nations. Which is why pooling sovereignty in foreign relations within the EU was such a terrible idea and one that never worked for us.
It did. It was brought in by Attlee's government.
Why does stuff like this get people so puce-faced and ANGRY?
Why resort to this flailing ad hominem?